Sittings · Document
Follow up to the European Parliament non-legislative resolution on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 87708 × MON 89788 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council
1. Resolution tabled pursuant to Rules 115(2) and (3) of the European Parliament’s Rules of procedure
2. References: 2025/2647(RSP) / B10-0244/2025 / P10_TA(2025)0106
3. Date of adoption of the resolution: 8 May 2025
4. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (ENVI)
5. Brief analysis/assessment of the resolution and requests made in it:
The resolution calls on the Commission to withdraw the draft Commission implementing decision and to submit a new draft to the committee (paragraph 3) on the grounds that it exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (paragraph 1) and that it is not compatible with the aim of that Regulation and the general principles of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, i.e. the protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment and consumer interests, whilst ensuring effective functioning of the internal market (paragraph 2).
The resolution calls on the Commission not to authorise herbicide-tolerant genetically modified (GM) plants products due to the increased use and lack of assessment of the complementary herbicides and the associated risks to biodiversity, food safety and workers’ health (paragraph 4 and recitals F to P).
It states that authorising the import for food and feed uses of any GM plant which has been made tolerant to herbicides is inconsistent with the European Union’s (EU) international commitments (paragraph 5). In addition, it urges the Commission to consider the EU’s obligations under international agreements, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the United Nations (UN) Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, as regards pesticide reduction and the halting of deforestation as a major cause of biodiversity decline and climate change (recitals S to Y), and recalls that soya is the largest contributor to deforestation linked to EU imports (recital Z). It reiterates its call on the Commission for draft implementing acts to be accompanied by an explanatory memorandum explaining how they uphold the principle of ‘do no harm’ (paragraph 9).
It expects the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to come forward with a proposal to ensure that hazardous chemicals banned in the EU are not produced for export, and to deliver on its commitment to ensure reciprocity by better aligning our domestic production standards with those applied to imports, notably for pesticides (paragraph 6).
The resolution recalls the conclusions of the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture that call on the Commission to reassess its approach on market access for agri-food imports and exports, given the challenge of diverging standards of the EU and its trading partners and ensuring a global level playing field (recital R), and to the need to reduce dependency on imported feed (recitals AA and AB). It therefore calls on the Commission to ensure convergence of standards between the EU and its partners in free trade agreement negotiations, in order to meet the EU’s safety standards (paragraph 7).
The resolution welcomes that the Commission recognises the need to take sustainability into account for the authorisation of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) and expresses its disappointment that the Commission proceeds with GMO authorisations for import despite ongoing European Parliament objections and a majority of Member States voting against (paragraph 8).
The resolution refers to ‘undemocratic’ decision-making recalling the numerous resolutions objections to GMO authorisations adopted by the European Parliament in its eighth, ninth, and the current tenth terms (recital AC) and the fact that authorising decisions continue to be adopted by the Commission with a lack of support from Member States and the objections of European Parliament (recitals AD and AF) and states that no change of law is required for the Commission not to authorise GMOs in the absence of a qualified majority of Member States in favour in the Appeal Committee (recital AE).
6. Response to the requests and overview of actions taken, or intended to be taken, by the Commission:
The Commission would like to recall that the draft implementing decision concerns the authorisation for the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of or produced from GM soybean MON 87705 × MON 87708 × MON 89788, but not the cultivation of this soybean.
With respect to paragraphs 1 and 3 of the resolution, the Commission would like to point out that the draft decision has been prepared in line with and has undergone the procedural steps set out in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on GM food and feed and in Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 on comitology, as illustrated below:
on 11 September 2015, Monsanto Europe S.A./N.V. on behalf Monsanto Company based in the United States, submitted to the national competent authority of the Netherlands an application for authorisation for the placing on the market of the on the market of GM soybean MON 87705 × MON 87708 × MON 89788 for food/feed and other uses, except of cultivation;
on 18 May 2020, EFSA adopted an inconclusive opinion, as it was unable to finalise the risk assessment due to the absence of a 90-day feeding study in rodents on GM soybean MON 87705 and a post-market monitoring plan;
on 20 March 2024, the applicant provided the additional data needed to fulfil the requirements for the risk assessment;
on 28 October 2024, EFSA issued a statement supplementing its scientific opinion of 18 May 2020, based on the additional data provided by the applicant, and concluded favourably that the GM soybean is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM soybean varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment;
in its scientific opinion, EFSA answered all the questions and concerns raised by the Member States in the context of the consultation of the national competent authorities as provided for by Article 6(4) and Article 18(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003;
the public commented on EFSA’s opinion and its complementing statement, and all the scientific comments received were scrutinised by EFSA, which confirmed the conclusions of its scientific opinion and the supplementary statement;
the draft decision was voted in the Standing Committee on 28 February 2025 with no qualified majority against or in favour;
the draft decision was voted in the Appeal Committee on 8 April 2025 with no qualified majority against or in favour;
in accordance with the rules set out in Regulation (EC) 1829/2003, a decision has to be taken on the application;
in accordance with the rules set out in Regulation (EC) No 182/2011 on comitology, it is for the Commission to decide on the adoption;
on that basis, the Commission adopted the decision on 4 July 2025.
The Commission therefore considers that by going forward with the adoption process of a decision that fully complies with the procedural steps set out by the co-legislators in the GMO legislation, it does not exceed its implementing powers.
With respect to the other provisions of the resolution, the Commission considers that they fall outside the remit of the right of scrutiny, which is limited to the question of whether the implementing act exceeds the implementing powers provided for in the basic act. The Commission is not required to justify the implementing act as regards these points. Nevertheless, the Commission has carefully considered the position expressed by the Parliament and would like to make the following comments:
EFSA performed a comprehensive risk assessment of this GM crop which concluded positively, after considering Member States’ comments as well as comments from the public. Therefore, the Commission considers that its decision is fully in line with the objectives of EU legislation on GM food and feed and of the EU’s General Food Law to protect health and the environment (paragraph 2).
In relation to the call on the Commission not to authorise the GM crop due to risks of increased use of herbicides resulting in risks to biodiversity, food safety and workers’ health (paragraph 4) and concerns raised about lack of assessment of the complementary herbicides (recitals F to P) and inconsistency with the EU international commitments (paragraph 5), the Commission would like to point out that, while the authorisation of GMOs is not linked to the authorisation of herbicides, the two authorisation systems are geared to ensure a high level of protection of health and the environment. The risk assessment of an application for food and feed uses of an herbicide-tolerant GM crop includes assessment of the safety of the GM crop sprayed with the herbicide by comparison to its conventional counterparts. EFSA concluded favourably for the GM crop concerned by this resolution as mentioned above. The environmental risk assessment of active substances and plant protection products is done in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. Maximum residue limits (MRLs) apply to all relevant imported food/ feed, including to GM products and ensure that the health of EU consumers is fully protected.
Regarding the call on the Commission expressed in paragraph 6 to come forward with a proposal to ensure that hazardous chemicals banned in the EU are not produced for export, and to deliver on its commitment to ensure reciprocity by better aligning our domestic production standards with those applied to imports, notably for pesticides, the Commission refers to the Chemical Strategy for Sustainability from October 2020 in which the Commission committed to work on ensuring that hazardous chemicals banned in the EU are not produced for export and to promote the EU industry as a global frontrunner in the production and use of safe and sustainable chemicals. The Commission has launched a study to examine various options for the possible preparation of an impact assessment. Further work on this initiative will be considered after the finalisation of the study.
In addition, as stated in the Vision for Agriculture and Food adopted on 19 February 2025, the Commission will establish a principle that the most hazardous pesticides banned in the EU for health and environmental reasons are not allowed back into the EU through imported products. To advance on this, the Commission will launch in 2025 an impact assessment that will consider the impact on the EU competitive position and the international implications and, if appropriate, propose amendments to the applicable legal framework.
Concerning the call on the Commission to ensure convergence of standards between the EU and its partners in free trade agreement negotiations, in order to meet the EU’s safety standards (paragraph 7), all imported food and feed must comply with relevant EU regulations and standards relating to safety and health, which are applicable irrespective of whether the product is produced domestically or imported.
In relation to the need to take sustainability into account in the authorisation of GMOs (paragraph 8), the Commission will shape the way forward as set out in the Vision for Agriculture and Food.
As regards the call to consider the EU’s international obligations (paragraph 9), the Commission is highly committed to respecting the EU’s international commitments in the field of the environment. However, the adoption of Commission decisions for the placing on the market of GMOs that do not present risks to health or to the environment does not run counter to such international commitments. With respect to the call expressed in this paragraph for draft implementing acts to be accompanied by an explanatory memorandum explaining how they uphold the principle of ‘do no harm’, the Commission would like to stress that the decision is based on a positive EFSA scientific opinion, as described above.
Issues related to market access for agri-food imports and exports, diverging standards of the EU and its trading partners (recital R) and reducing dependency of imported critical commodities (recital AA) will be part of the Commission’s work in accordance with its political guidelines and the mission letters of the responsible Commissioners. However, such issues cannot be addressed in the context of the Commission decisions for the placing on the market of GMOs.
Finally, with regards to the arguments concerning the ‘undemocratic’ decision-making process and the lack of support by the Member States for any GMO authorisation for food and feed uses (recitals AC to AF), the Commission submitted a proposal to the Council and the Parliament on 14 February 2017 to amend Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, changing the voting rules at the Appeal Committee to increase transparency and accountability in the GMO decision-making process. However, this proposal has not been adopted by the co-legislators. In light of this situation, the Commission has taken the decision to withdraw the proposal, which will be procedurally finalised shortly. As such, the Commission is bound to apply the procedures laid down in Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 on comitology and in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on GM food and feed.