Skip to content
Adopted text

Genetically modified maize MON 88017 (MON-88Ø17-3)

TA-9-2020-0368 · P9_TA(2020)0368 · PE661.545

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 25 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

Parliament adopted a resolution objecting to the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for genetically modified maize MON 88017 for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation. Parliament considers the draft decision exceeds the Commission's implementing powers and is not consistent with Union law, and calls on the Commission to withdraw it. Parliament raises concerns about Member State criticisms of EFSA opinions, herbicide residues, toxicity studies using isolated proteins, effects on non-target organisms, and resistance development. Parliament calls on the Commission to stop authorising GMOs when Member States deliver no opinion, not to authorise herbicide-tolerant GM crops until health risks are investigated, and to develop sustainability criteria. Parliament calls on EFSA to widen its risk assessment, require tests with GM plant tissue, ensure field trial data cover broad conditions and varieties, and request data on intestinal microbiome impacts.

Key points

  1. Parliament considers the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.
  2. Parliament considers the draft decision is not consistent with Union law, as it is not compatible with the aim of ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, and environmental and consumer interests.
  3. Parliament calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision.
  4. Parliament welcomes the Commission's recognition of the need to take sustainability into account in GMO authorisation decisions, but expresses strong disappointment that the Commission authorised another GM soybean for import despite an objection by Parliament and a majority of Member States voting against.
  5. Parliament calls on the Commission to move forward with the utmost urgency on developing sustainability criteria, with full involvement of Parliament, and to provide information on the process and timeframe.
  6. Parliament urges the Commission to take into account the Union's obligations under international agreements, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN CBD and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, in the authorisation process.
  7. Parliament reiterates its call on the Commission to stop authorising GMOs, whether for cultivation or for food and feed uses, when no opinion is delivered by Member States in the Appeal Committee.
  8. Parliament reiterates its call on the Commission not to authorise herbicide-tolerant GM crops until health risks associated with residues have been comprehensively investigated on a case-by-case basis, including residues from spraying, break-down products and combinatorial effects.
  9. Parliament calls on EFSA to accept the differences between native Bt toxins and those expressed by synthetic transgenes in GM crop plants, and to widen its risk assessment to fully take into account all interactions and combinatorial effects.
  10. Parliament calls on EFSA to no longer accept toxicity studies based on isolated proteins and to require that all tests are carried out with tissue from the GM plant.
  11. Parliament calls on EFSA to ensure that data from field trials or green houses cover a sufficiently broad range of agronomic and environmental conditions and different varieties to assess impacts on gene expression and plant composition.
  12. Parliament calls on EFSA to request data on the impact of the consumption of food and feed derived from GM plants on the intestinal microbiome.

Who is affected

  • The Commission, which is asked to withdraw the draft decision and stop authorising GMOs in certain cases.
  • The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which is asked to widen its risk assessment and change its requirements for studies.
  • Member States, whose concerns about EFSA opinions and lack of qualified majority support are highlighted.
  • The authorisation holder Monsanto Company and Monsanto Europe N.V., which applied for renewal of the authorisation.

Figures and deadlines

  • 26 October 2020: vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health at which no opinion was delivered.
  • 10 July 2018: date Monsanto Europe N.V. submitted the renewal application to the Commission.
  • 21 April 2009: date EFSA adopted a favourable opinion on the initial authorisation application.
  • 29 January 2020: date EFSA adopted a favourable opinion on the renewal application.
  • 36 resolutions: total adopted by Parliament in its eighth term objecting to GMO authorisations.
  • Eleven objections: number adopted by Parliament in its ninth term to date.
  • 20-fold: enhancement of insecticidal activity of Bt toxins by proteinase inhibitors in a 1990 study.
  • 39 peer-reviewed publications: number reporting significant adverse effects of Bt toxins on out-of-range species.

Legal basis: Articles 11(3) and 23(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed.