A lengthy prose, intricately spun, and elegantly inked, was the megaphone with which Dr. Abu Sakara Foster bellowed ? in what came out as a rather frantic effort to ward off critics. In an almost feverish tone, Dr. Sakara, in one fell swoop, attempted swatting off his supposed detractors; while at the same time imploring them to let him off accusations of the GMO gravy train.
In recent months, the GMO debate has clearly unmasked a lot of acquiescence on the part of our political and institutional leadership to foreign interests in a most theatrical manner. Also caught in the ensuing drama is the former CPP flag bearer, who also doubles as a renowned agronomist.
In his release, Dr. Sakara could be described, at best, as sounding very academic and professorial; while staying quite oblivious or mentally blank about the crude realities on the ground. He frenetically sought to find that very elusive middle ground in the ensuing melee; to the point where he had to make assertions to the effect that his ideological position was different from his profession -? a comment which in context seems to border on duplicity, if not the illogical, upon a little interrogation.
Let?s now take a look at excerpts of how the ace agronomist and politician sought to pact with the two wolves within.
Dr. Sakara Writes:
?I do not support a ban on GMO?s under all circumstances, neither do I accept the blind adoption of GMO?s under any circumstances. Each country must make a critical examination of its decision based on scientific evidence and strategic policy considerations. ?
From the above statement, the man began to lay the shaky foundation of his position. But one would want to ask; what makes Dr. Sakara think his position is any different from the anti-gmo campaigners? These are people who are making arguments that we have not delved into the issue of GMOs enough, per research and national policy debate in order to adopt them. So if Dr. Sakara truly claims he does not accept the blind adoption of GMOs, then where does his criticism of the anti-gmo movement stand?
He then decided to lend a sort of pseudo-credibility to the introduction of GMO?s into Ghana, albeit surreptitiously;
?I am aware of a number MEAs (multilateral environmental agreements) that Ghana is already party to. Prior informed consent (PIC), the Polluter Pays Principle in environmental impact assessment and the precautionary principle have informed my expectation on the use of GMO?s. l expect that GMO?s will be used to complement efforts in conventional agriculture to achieve sustainable food systems with greater productivity?
One would want to ask Dr. Sakara this; were those lofty environmental principles not existing when mining, indiscriminate logging and other forms of reckless resource exploitation came in and continue to rape this country in the full glare of all the citizenry? How well have we lived up to this conventions as a precedence to inform how we handle the issue of GMOs?? We currently have a Biosafety law but with no Authority to enforce it institutionally. However, we have hurriedly begun trials on our soils; and already pushing laws to protect multinationals. Are these not sufficient concerns for Dr. Sakara to stand up against a blind adoption of GMOs? What more signs is he still waiting for?
He then went on with his tacit support for GMOs;
?GMO?s technologies have demonstrated significant reduction in some operational costs and improved profitability. More than 5.5 million farmers growing GMO crops on more than 56 million hectares in twenty six (26) countries cannot be wrong about their profit margins. I also doubt very much whether farmers need an activist or even an economist to tell them whether they are making profit or not. It is a common mistake to arrogantly assume that Africa?s small scale farmers don?t know what is good for them because they may be illiterate.?
If Dr. Sakara, inferring from the statistics he quoted above, believes that GMOs are good enough, then why doesn?t he come out boldly to say so; and for that reason Ghana should adopt them no holds barred? Are there some reasons why Dr. Sakara is on the fence? Then why didn?t he juxtapose the myriads of anti-gmo statistics with the pros that he stated grandly? ?Why didn?t he put out in his write up the fact ?also that; together with the EU, which is our second largest trading partner, more than 166 countries across the world including Japan, Luxemburg, Australia and the state of California and Hawaii have all BANNED genetically modified foods? Why does Dr. Sakara think it is economically worthwhile to jump on the GMO bandwagon when our major trading partners are not ready to accept such produce based on their standards? Are we to do so simply because some 26 countries, including our three neighbours, far less than the opposed 166, have accepted it?
As a typical politicians? syndrome, his piece would have been rather incomplete without a bout of some play to the gallery.? It is a fact that our farmers are fundamentally influenced by national policy decisions; which are largely impacted by activists and economists. So to say that these groups should not intervene when an issue that affects our farmers is tabled is quite absurd. And who said the crops that are grown by farmers are not consumed by all across the socioeconomic spectrum? So why then attempt to limit the debate to our farmers? Is this an attempt to play on the stereotype we associate with small scale farming in this country for the purposes of eliciting sympathetic support? If so, then this is one in very bad taste.
Another notable point that betrays the stoic academic disposition and borderline aloofness in his piece is this;
?The institutions dealing with Bio-safety for both food and environmental regulatory standards should be strengthened as part of the process of any future deployment of GMO?s?
Hello Dr. Sakara, there is no institution in Ghana wholly tasked to deal solely with the ominous event of bio-safety; much less talk about strengthening such an entity. News Flash Doc ? the Biosafety law requires a Biosafety Authority which is nonexistent. The EPA has a handful to deal with in terms of our numerous environmental challenges ? I guess I need not refresh your memory about galamsey and all the myriads of environmental evils they are struggling to contain.? ?So, do we sincerely believe they will do that clean job to keep us safe in the event of all the uncertainties surrounding GMOs?
Given we had entities that are in charge, if we are to go by Dr. Sakara?s ?prognosis that they be strengthened as part of the process, then, don?t we have to do the strengthening first before the introduction? Or should it be the case as we have perpetually done in Ghana, that our institutional capacity would have to once again be chasing up with the bio-safety concerns that GMOs are likely to present? This is being said in the light of the fact that we are alreadyofficially growing samples.
Dr. Sakara went ahead to find a convenient platform to strike at the anti-GMO position;
?Each country is free to have their own seed law and Ghana already has one governing the formulation, release and commercialisation of seeds in general. Additional specific provisions are now being made for GMO?s. So to think that the preparation of a legal framework for GMO?s is now bringing commercialisation of seed into Ghana is gross ignorance.?
If I have been following the GMO debate well, I believe the issue of concern being raised is that of opening up the commercialization of our seeds globally; within a context where we stand no chance of surviving the patent battle. Dr. Sakara?s argument could only have been valid if he can boldly declare that our CSIR can stand up to the Mosanto?s in the looming event of potential seed wars. He can only have a point if there hadn?t been events of exploitation by these foreign seed concerns, like the over a thousand percentage price hikes as observed in India and elsewhere. With a non-competitive R&D sector nationally, I wonder why Dr. Sakara sees as ignorance the resistance by the anti-GMO movement to the current legislation; especially ?clause 23?.
However, after impugning ignorance to the resistors of the current plant breeders? bill in one breadth; he moves on to say this in another;
?A legislative frame work allows each country to set the provisions for how GMO?s should be developed, released and commercialized within the country. Nationals do this themselves using their legislature, Nobody does it for them! So why are people who are concerned about risk of seed monopolies not interested in drafting anti-trust laws to amend the LI on GMO?s even before it comes to parliament again? Are they not aware that recently in a land mark ruling in Brazil, small scale farmers have been awarded a multi-milllion dollar judgement against Monsanto for illegally collecting royalties from them against the stipulations of the national seed law??
Accordingly, if Dr. Sakara sees the need for the drafting of an anti-trust law to amend the current LI, then he necessarily must have seen the need to stem the rush in this process. So why was he attempting to generalize the effort of the resistance as ignorance? He attempts to say later on in his piece that he had been advising on the need to tackle the legal angle of the issue. If Dr. Sakara were as concerned as he would want readers to believe he is; then why doesn?t he push that angle in ways he deems fit? He has no mean clout when it comes to issues like this, so why play arm chair advocate and try to slight the efforts of those involved?
In effect, one clearly wonders where Dr. Abu Sakara stands in this debate and how he wants it conducted. This is the man who advocated civility in the entire debate and rebuked finger pointing. However, he had this to say to the anti-gmo movement;
?Much can be said about where all the funding for anti-gmo activism is coming from and the apparent motive to defend our food sovereignty. Where was this much touted desire to protect our food sovereignty when fish stocks in our oceans are being overfished for sale in Europe resulting in the destruction of our ocean beds??
Somebody should ask Dr. Abu Sakara Foster this; should the event of overfishing our ocean stock preclude anybody from advocating our food safety? Talk of an ad hominem cum perfectionist laden argument pitched in black-and ? white fallacy.
