[asia-apec 872] News & Stories from Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (Part 1)

[APPA]

THE RAG
(Resistance Against Globalisation)

APPA Daily Bulletin No. 4, Thursday, November 12, 1998
(Page 1 to Page 3)

POLICE HARASS CONFERENCE

Squatter visit disrupted by police intimidation

Sentul, Wednesday: APPA participants who travelled to Chubadak Village,
Sentul, to visit a squatter settlement were confronted by police today.
	 The 50 delegates, comprising mainly community leaders and advocates of
housing rights, arrived just after 9am to register for the forum on urban
poor at the village's community hall when two police cars appeared. A chief
inspector with a name tag "Ali" approached the organisers demanding to know
what the meeting was about. 
	Forum co-ordinator Rahim Ishak explained that the forum was being held in
conjunction with APPA to discuss globalisation and its impact on the
people. He also explained that it was a "closed door" meeting and that
delegates were there by invitation only.
	By this time, Chief Inspector "Ali" started looking impatient and, acting
arrogantly, tried to grab the registration list from an APPA volunteer. The
volunteer managed to pull the list away from "Ali" who then threatened to
arrest the volunteers if they did that to him again. He then called his
superior "Fawzy" who arrived an hour later. The forum was allowed to go on
so long as there were no plans to have any outdoor activities. 
	The police remained until 4pm when the deputy OCPD by the name of Haji
Jaafar arrived and questioned Rahim on the objectives of the forum. Rahim
once again explained that it was within the ambits of the law. Haji Jafaar
informed Rahim that the police were acting on a complain by villagers that
there might be trouble. The police left at 5.30pm when the delegates left,
but had managed to delay the forum's proceedings and prevent the delegation
from visiting a squatter community in order to understand the issues
better.
	In a press release later, the APPA Organising Committee protested strongly
against the unwarranted police harrassment and demanded an explanation for
the stationing of a policeman outside the hall when the participants were
merely exercising their right to assemble peacefully at a closed-door
meeting.
	"This form of harassment was completely unnecessary and unwarranted. The
meeting was by special invitation only. We deplore this act as it is
tantamount to instilling fear among the people," said Cynthia Gabriel, APPA
co-ordinator.


IS GLOBALISATION COMPATIBLE WITH HUMAN RIGHTS?

Delegates differ in opinion ............

Federal Hotel, Wed: After an uneventful start, the Human Rights Forum burst
into life in the afternoon session "Human Rights and Globalisation - Are
They Compatible?"
	John Kellock (Amnesty International) argued that the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (UDHR) provides the blocks upon which the globalisation
process should be built, and which guarantee the right of individuals and
organisations to participate freely in the process of globalisation.
	"The task we face is to make globalisation work for us all, to make it a
rights based process which benefits us all, that brings us together not
further apart, that respects all our differences yet affirms what is common
to us all," he said in his paper. "I would like to say that the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and globalisation are not only compatible but
mutually re-inforcing."
	Other participants disagreed. Ross Daniels (Queensland University of
Technology, Australia) said that "globalisation is incompatible with human
rights because it is reinforcing and deepening relative power and
inequities." Debbie Stothard (Altsean-Burma) felt the title of the
discussion itself was a red herring. "The global movement for human rights
is not necessarily part of the globalisation process. The fight for human
rights is an on-going one regardless of the era it is in," she added.
	In a fiery presentation, Ross accused multinational or transnational
corporations (TNCs) of being the main force behind globalisation over the
last couple of decades. "In light of the comparative power shift from
states to TNCs, it is imperative that the human rights movement focus its
attention on non-state actors," he said, labelling TNCs "devils". The forum
continues tomorrow.


FOREST ACTIVISTS PLAN GLOBAL ACTION
News from the Environment and Forestry Forum

YMCA, Brickfields, Wed: Forest activists from around the Pacific Rim
outlined their concerns about globalisation and its impact on forest
ecosystems and communities. 
	They discussed their opposition to the pressure by some APEC countries Ð
especially the US and Canada - to move forward its plans for deregulation
of the timber trade through the "Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalisation"
(EVSL) process, despite opposition from forest-dependent communities; the
lack of an assessment of the deregulation's environmental, social, and
cultural impacts; and APEC's undemocratic discussion of the forest trade
deregulation.
	Participants also reported on their struggles against globalisation around
the Asia-Pacific region. They heard about the struggles to obtain
indigenous land rights in Sarawak, to protect the last ancient forests of
the US Pacific Northwest, to prevent the logging and burning of Russian Far
East forests by foreign companies, to stop the IMF's and World Bank's
destructive plans to develop palm oil plantations in Indonesia, and to
conserve the last remaining native forests of Western Australia.
	The forest session participants talked about the importance of indigenous
land rights and respecting indigenous people's knowledge about forest
stewardship, gender and forestry issues, issues with certification of
sustainable forestry, and the danger of misusing "sustainable development"
terms by government and corporations to subvert communities' rights to
forest management.
	Forest activists also talked about how to work together and build a strong
Pacific Rim network of forest activists that will stand up to APEC's forest
deregulation plans and other threats to the region's forests. They
discussed how to work together between countries to track transnational
corporations that are moving around the world to destroy forest ecosystems,
such as US companies in Chile, Japanese companies in Canada, and a
Malaysian company in the Russian Far East.
	The environment and forestry forum continues tomorrow at the YMCA, where
forest activists will develop a statement opposing APEC's timber trade
deregulation plans and discuss common strategies for building a Pacific Rim
network.


GENETIC ENGINEERING ERODES FOOD SECURITY, ENSLAVES FARMERS
By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin

Hotel Grand Olympic, Tues: Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the
Pacific's Safe Food Campaign 1998 were launched at the APPA Land, Food
Security and Agriculture Forum in Kuala Lumpur by a panel of scientists,
health, environmental and consumer activists. The theme of the campaign,
"Say NO! to Genetic Engineering in agriculture and food production", aimed
to debunk corporate propaganda that genetic engineering was the panacea for
all our food needs into the next century. There is ever increasing evidence
that this technology has more problems than solutions for us all. 
	Launching the campaign, Sarojeni Rengam said: "Genetically engineered
foods involves too many problems and unresolved issues, and these issues
are of concern to the whole of Asia. This is because more and more
genetically engineered foods are being imported into Asian countries,
ostensibly to meet the food needs of the region.
	"We can feed ourselves without genetically engineered foods," she said. 
"It is an unnecessary technology.  Our farmers do not want it, our
consumers do not need it." Only agrochemical and seed corporations will
benefit from it.
	PAN Asia and the Pacific is collaborating with its network partners in the
region to carry out this campaign. "Growing concern over these 'miracle'
foods and the lack of information has prompted coordinated action over this
issue," said Jennifer Mourin, campaign coordinator. "Corporate dominance of
our food production is being propelled by trade liberalisation via trade
blocks like APEC, and free trade agreements like GATT.  This calls for
concerted action against genetically engineered foods in the region."
	The panel of experts, which included Dr. Vandana Shiva, Dr. Micheal
Hansen, Dr. Romeo Quijano, Barbara Dinham and Mika Iba, talked about how
genetically engineered food was being forced upon countries by corporations
and the various issues involved.
	Dr. Vandana Shiva said Monsanto, which was the biggest player in the game,
is the "worst global terrorist."  It is forcing the "hazardous food" on all
countries, using tremendous pressure and misleading promotional campaigns.
Monsanto has, in fact, "held the US Food and Drug Administration captive,"
she stated. "It is a terrorist in not allowing people to have the food they
want, by refusing to segregate genetically engineered food crops and to
label genetically engineered foods. And through force, coercion and terror,
Monsanto is trying to control the world's food production. We must try to
make the food system more democratic by relating closely with farmers."
	She also said that, significantly, insurance companies were refusing to
cover liability on genetically engineered foods, which is a reflection of
its safety. The trade agreements do not talk about liabilities. "We must
force the exporting countries to accept liabilities. If there is no
liability, there is no trade or biosafety protocol, either".
	Dr. Michael Hansen, of the New York based Consumer Policy Institute warned
that genetically engineered foods can cause severe, potentially fatal,
allergies.  Genetically modified peanuts, dairy products and shellfish were
particularly dangerous, and there have been tested cases of allergy from
soyabeans. "Without labelling, it is even impossible to trace what food you
are reacting to. Europe and India are demanding labelling, and other
countries should put pressure.
	"One of the greatest dangers of genetically engineered foods is the
development of antibiotic resistance in consumers because of the antibiotic
maker genes used in the process of modifying genes," he said.  This is
particularly worrisome in the context of the already increasing antibiotic
resistance in the case of several infections diseases. Genetically
engineered crops could also cause ecological disruptions as the modified
genes can cross-over to other, non-engineered crops, creating "superweeds".
	As resistance to genetically engineered foods mounts in the US and Europe,
"there is a danger that it will be dumped on the South," he warned. There
are already "significant imports" of soyabean in countries such as
Singapore and South Korea.
	In Europe, anger among the people caused by "mad cow" disease has been
stoked further by genetically engineered foods, said Barbara Dinham, of the
Pesticides Trust based in London. "There is resistance in Europe because
consumers feel genetically engineered foods are unsafe and their effects
irreversible."  One food chain in England has refused to buy genetically
engineered foods. And there are movements opposing the import of
genetically engineered foods and the planting of genetically engineered
crops, which may force the European Commission to rethink its stand on
these issues.
	Health and environmental activist, Dr. Romeo Quijano pointed out that
small and poor farmers in the Asian region will be affected by the monopoly
corporate control of genetically engineered seeds through patents. "This
will worsen their dependence," he said.  "Governments in the region are
collaborators in pushing genetically engineered crops. National committees
to regulate genetically engineered crops and foods are actually
facilitating their entry instead of regulating. And there are no safety or
toxicological tests."
	In Asia, most countries look up to Japan in matters of food issues, but
Mika Ika said Japan did not have statutory regulation of genetically
engineered foods, and there was also a lack of information. "There are only
voluntary safety guidelines, and much of the information comes from
Monsanto itself". In fact, the US Department of Agriculture, which has a
high stake in promoting genetically engineered foods, had been leading
"intensive education" programmes on the safety of genetically engineered
foods in Japan. Japanese consumers are now demanding labelling of
genetically engineered foods, she said.
	As part of the Campaign, PAN AP also organised a lecture tour of Dr Hansen
to several countries in Asia, including Thailand. One major outcome of his
trip there came on Nov 6 when the Thai Biotec Centre admitted that
"genetically engineered foods and agricultural products may pose a health
hazard". Dr Suthat Sriwathanapong (National Centre for Genetic Engineering
and Technology), said to protect consumers against this possible health
risk, the Thai Food and Drug Administration should issue a more
comprehensive rule to regulate genetically engineered drugs and products.  
	The issues of genetic engineering as a tool of corporate control over our
resources, increasing farmers' dependency on foreign technological inputs,
and threats to human health and environment will be discussed at the forum
on Land, Food Security and Agriculture.