1
Open Letter to the Chief Executive of the World Wild Fund for Nature-UK
Glyn Davies
Acting Chief Executive
WWF-UK
Dear Glyn
You will remember I sent an Open Letter to WWF-US on 02/10/20151 and asked WWF-UK to
forward it to them. This Open Letter is addressed to WWF-UK. How is it that WWF-UK is
campaigning and raising money to conserve species abroad, but is not providing a service to
the UK? I could find no reference to The State of Nature Report 2016 on your website.
The State of Nature Report 2016
Mark Eaton of the RSPB, the Report’s first author said: “The report includes a new
“biodiversity intactness index”, which analyses the loss of species over centuries. The UK has
lost significantly more nature over the long term than the global average with the UK the
29th lowest out of 218 countries. “It is quite shocking where we stand compared to the rest
of the world, even compared to other western European countries: France and Germany are
quite a way above us in the rankings,” said Eaton. “The index gives an idea of where we have
got to over the centuries, and we are pretty knackered.”
Biodiversity Intactness Index
This is a link to an animated pictorial representation but it is not easily findable.2
“Of 218 countries assessed, the UK is ranked 189: it is 29th lowest out of 218: Countries
below are the Republic of Ireland, USA, Hong Kong and Macao. This means that nature is
faring worse in the UK than in most other countries.
Around 75% of the UK is managed for food production. How we manage that land is key to
the state of Nature.
UK 165 species are considered critically endangered and likely to go extinct.
England 109 species are critically endangered and likely to go extinct.
Scotland 65 species are critically endangered and are likely to go extinct.
Northern Ireland 45 species are critically endangered and likely to go extinct.
Wales 41 species are critically endangered and likely to go extinct.”
Most UK farmers who manage ‘75% of UK land’ are drowning their crops in pesticides
The National Farmers’ Union (NFU), the Crop Protection Association (CPA) and the
Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC) combine to lobby the EU not to restrict the 320+
pesticides available to them. The publication is called: HEALTHY HARVEST. 3 The countries
that have even lower Biodiversity Intactness Indices are similarly working with the
Agrochemical Corporations: the Republic of Ireland and the USA.
Complete denial that farming was responsible
It was therefore astounding to see the complete denial of the NFU and Defra about The
State of Nature Report. NFU vice-president Guy Smith said “intensification of farming had
ended in the early 1990s.” that farmers “were using less fertiliser and pesticides than ever”
1
https://www.academia.edu/16404294/Open_letter_to_WWF-US
2
https://ww2.rspb.org.uk/whatwedo/stateofnature2016
2
https://ww2.rspb.org.uk/whatwedo/stateofnature2016
3
Healthy Harvest: The impact of losing plant protection products on UK food and plant production.
http://www.nfuonline.com/assets/30597
2
and a spokeswoman from Defra said: “Protecting our precious environment and supporting
our world-leading farmers, a cornerstone of our economy, will form an important part of out
EU exit negotiations.” The statistics for pesticide usage produced by Fera show exactly the
opposite. Isn’t Defra supposed to be advising the UK Government?
Results are out for species that have declined in summer 2016 compared with 2015
From the Butterfly Conservation Trust Big Butterfly Count 4 “It was a pretty good summer,
with above average temperatures and yet butterflies on the whole fared badly. Over half of
the big butterfly count target species decreased in 2016 compared with the previous year.
The 'blues' did badly, with Small Copper recording its lowest numbers since the big butterfly
count began and both Common Blue and Holly Blue halved in numbers compared with
summer 2015. This was particularly disappointing for Holly Blue, which had an excellent 2015
and numbers in spring 2016 also appeared high. The stunning Peacock, with its beautiful eye-
spot wing markings that can scare off would-be predators such as Blue Tits, decreased for
the third summer in a row. Its numbers have now dropped from an average of 3.6 individuals
per count in 2013 to just 0.5 per count in 2016, a sixfold decrease over three years. Small
Tortoiseshell numbers were down once again too, falling by 47% from 2015 levels, and even
the Comma, one of the butterfly success stories of the past few decades, suffered a poor
summer. Its numbers were down 46% year on year, resulting in its lowest abundance in the
seven years of big butterfly count. It was all change at the top of the big butterfly count chart
in 2016, with Gatekeeper, the most abundant species in 2015's count, suffering a 40%
decrease and finishing in fourth place. An average of just 1.5 Gatekeepers seen per count in
2016 was the lowest abundance of this species since big butterfly count began.”
Toads “Toad numbers have fallen by more than two-thirds in 30 years, according to a study
using data from volunteer patrols set up to help the amphibians cross roads.”5
Even in the 1970s the Agricultural Industry was given massive power by the British
Government
Robert van den Bosch, writing in 1978 in The Pesticide Conspiracy:6 “If one considers how
dangerous these chemicals are, one would suppose that it would be Government policy to
minimize their use by every possible means. However the Royal Commission on
Environmental Pollution notes, ‘there is... no such policy in the UK, nor does the possible
need for it appear to have been considered, notwithstanding the great increases in the use of
these chemicals.’
The Agrochemical Industry, on the contrary, seems to be under the impression it is
Government policy to encourage the maximum use of pesticides. Thus according to the
Agrochemical industry, of 367,000 acres of potatoes grown in this country in 1976, 310,000
acres are treated with herbicides, 114,000 acres with granular insecticides and nematocides,
218,000 acres with foliar insecticides and 265,000 acres with fungicides. 7 In this way one
acre of potatoes, the industry boasts, can be treated from 2-11 times with different
pesticides.” Van den Bosch also condemns the UK for aerial spraying. “What is particularly
shameful in this country is the prevalence of aerial spraying. One million acres of agricultural
4
http://www.bigbutterflycount.org/2016mainresults?utm_source=Butterfly%20Conservation&utm_m
edium=email&utm_campaign=7591230_October%202016&utm_content=BBC%20results&dm_i=DGT,
4IPFI,KNFC3B,GQ32W,1
5
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/06/uk-common-toad-numbers-down-two-
thirds-in-30-years
6
Van den Bosch, R. The Pesticide Conspiracy: USA Doubleday & Company (1978): Dorchester, UK:
Prism Press (1980).
7
Industry’s Statistics: British Agrochemical Association London 1976
3
land are sprayed each year, which involves 34,000 flights. Controls on this practice are
practically non-existent...nor as the Royal Commission points out, does there appear to be
any controls on the type of spraying equipment.” Britain still uses aerial spraying as
derogation from the EU recommendations.
Sustainable Use of Pesticides 21 October 2009: DIRECTIVE 2009/128/EC OF THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT 8 What is the EU Directive Advice and the UK Government’s Response on
Article 9 Aerial Spraying?
EU Directive Advice: Aerial spraying of pesticides has the potential to cause significant
adverse impacts on human health and the environment, in particular from spray drift.
Therefore aerial spraying should generally be prohibited with derogations possible where it
represents clear advantages in terms of reduced impacts on human health and the
environment in comparison with other spraying methods, or where there are no viable
alternatives, provided that the best available technology to reduce drift is used.
UK Government Response: We do not consider that responsible application of pesticides by
aerial spraying poses an unacceptable risk to human health and the environment, and
consequently we will use the derogation. We believe that the existing legislation control
regime provides a basis for meeting the Directive and this will be adapted to ensure the
continuation of properly regulated aerial applications through a consent-based approach.
The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution was abolished on 1 April 2011, as part of
the Coalition Government's spending cuts. It had been created under Royal Warrant in 1970
to advise the Queen, Government, Parliament and the public on environmental issues.
Food and Environment Research Agency (FERA) survey of pesticides 1988 to 2014
These indicate that Pesticide Residues on British food are increasing annually. A survey of
pesticide (active substances) usage on Oil Seed Rape (OSR) 1988-2014 showed that the
number of active substances applied had increased from 5 in 1988 to 15 in 2014 (Fig 1) and
the number of treatments had increased from 5 in 1988 to 12 in 2014. (Fig 2) In 2014,
herbicides were used on 98.4% OSR and seed treatments on 95.8%.
In 2014 glyphosate was used on Wheat (601,330 kg) Winter barley, Spring barley, Oats, Rye,
Triticale, Oilseed rape (577,969 kg), Linseed, All potatoes, Peas, Beans, Sugar beet, with a
total of 1,765,465 kg glyphosate on all crops. The total weight of pesticides (herbicides and
desiccants, fungicides, growth regulators, molluscicides and repellants, insecticides and seed
treatments) applied to farmland in 2014 was in excess of 16,000 tonnes.
Pesticide usage statistics show massive increase in glyphosate between 2012 and 2014
Fera statistics showed that in 2012 the area treated by glyphosate was 1,750,000 ha. This
had increased in 2014 to 2,250,000 ha. Guy Gagen, Chief Arable Adviser for the NFU, said
increased glyphosate use (up one third since 2012, to an area the size of Wales) was
probably due to treatment of ‘black grass.’9 Black grass is a glyphosate-resistant super-weed
just like Japanese knotweed. Herbicide resistant black grass, first seen in 1982 (two years
after farmers started spraying glyphosate pre-harvest) and is now found on 16,000 farms in
34 counties. Gagen said that spraying wheat could result in traces of glyphosate ending up in
bread sold in supermarkets but the amount was well below the maximum residue level set
by the EU. A Defra spokesman said: “There are extensive regulations in place so that people
and the environment are protected from pesticides. The approval of glyphosate for use
across Europe is being reviewed by the EU Commission.”
8
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32009L0128
9
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article4528297.ece
4
Figure: Pesticides - active
substances
20
Number of active substances
15
Molluscicides
10
Insecticides
5
Fungicides
0
Herbicides
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
Year
Fig. 1 PESTICIDES: Number of active substances used on Oil Seed Rape in the UK between 1988 and
2014: By kind permission of John Hoar, Hampshire Beekeeper’s Spray Liaison Officer. Figures supplied
by FERA
Figure: Pesticides - times treated
14
Number of treatments
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Year
Fig. 2 PESTICIDES TIMES TREATED: used on Oil Seed Rape in the UK between 1988 and 2014: By kind
permission of John Hoar, Hampshire Beekeepers Spray Liaison Officer. Figures supplied by FERA
In 2011, we wrote to WWK-UK and asked if they would join our campaign against the
systemic neonicotinoid insecticides
You and David Nussbaum, the then CEO said: “WWF doesn’t ‘do’ pesticides any longer.
CHEM Trust does it for us.” We did indeed contact CHEM Trust, a charity set up in 2007:
Protecting Humans and Wildlife from Harmful Chemicals.10 However, I’ve discovered that in
2002/2003, WWF-UK, in its more ‘caring for people in the UK’ role, did undertake bio-
monitoring for pesticides instead of corporate funding for big animals around the globe.
What happened since 2003? I have discovered that WWF-UK was ‘taken over’ in 2004.
10
http://www.chemtrust.org.uk
5
CONTAMINATION: The results of WWF-UK’s Bio-monitoring Survey November 2003 11
On the second page there was a picture of a baby superimposed by a challenge: WHO CARES
WHERE THE CHEMICALS END UP? This was an advertisement that appeared in the media in
2002. There was a courageous and defiant statement from the ‘old, caring’ WWF-UK: “This
advertisement appeared in the media in 2002 but was banned by the Advertising Standards
Authority (ASA), even though it agreed with WWF that man-made chemicals are causing
widespread contamination of humans and wildlife. Chemical industry lobby groups had
complained that the advertisement overstated the risk of chemicals to human health.
WWF is perturbed that, by asking the ASA to ban this advertisement, the chemical lobby has
managed to influence what the public is allowed to know about chemical contamination. The
lobby is now attempting to weaken the proposed EU chemical legislation that, as a result,
could end up providing no additional public protection.” It is the same in the UK in 2016;
British people are still being used as LAB RATS in an uncontrolled global experiment – and
yet no one tells them, neither the government nor the Corporate Media.
In 2003, according to WWF-UK the European Commission and World Health Organization
expressed ‘concern’ about man-made chemicals; yet in 2002 glyphosate was re-licensed12
with the help of the industry and the WHO JMPR13 (Joint Meeting for Pesticide Residues)
“Given the concern expressed by international organizations such as the European
Commission and the World Health Organization about the potential harm from man-made
chemicals, this report makes unnerving reading. We are facing an uncontrolled global
experiment where humans and wildlife are being exposed to man- made synthetic chemicals
that have the potential to harm. It is time to wake up to this threat and ensure that exposure
to such chemicals is controlled – and, where necessary, that they are banned.
The ASA rejected all complaints relating to the scientific and technical content of the
advertisement.
Industry representatives disputed whether:
• more than 300 man-made chemicals are present in human bodies;
• all these chemicals are present in the foetus;
• man-made chemicals are more dangerous than naturally occurring ones;
• presence of these chemicals is dangerous even at low levels;
• pollutants are found in intensively farmed food; and
• man-made chemicals are linked to birth defects in humans.
The ASA found WWF’s scientific research to be above reproach on all fronts and rejected
every technical complaint. But despite being ruled factually accurate and being in the public
interest, the advertisement was nevertheless banned on the grounds that it was ‘unduly
alarming’.
Executive summary
WWF visited 13 locations in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales in the summer of
2003 and took blood samples from 155 volunteers. Lancaster University analysed the
samples for 78 chemicals: 12 organo-chlorine pesticides (including DDT and lindane), 45 PCB
congeners and 21 polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) flame retardants, including those
found in the commercially traded penta-, octa- and deca-BDEs.
WWF believes that this survey provides the first data on the concentrations of PCBs, organo-
chlorine pesticides and PBDEs in the UK population’s blood serum. Further, these results form
11
http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/biomonitoringresults.pdf
12
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2006/9241665203_eng.pdf?ua=1
13
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/17/unwho-panel-in-conflict-of-interest-
row-over-glyphosates-cancer-risk
6
the most comprehensive and largest data-set of organo-halogen chemical concentrations in
humans in the UK in the last 10 years at least. In addition, the survey is the first that tries to
link findings of chemical contamination to people’s lifestyles.
FINDINGS
• Every person tested is contaminated by a cocktail of known highly toxic chemicals which
were banned from use in the UK during the 1970s and which continue to pose unknown
health risks.
• We found 70 (90 per cent) of the 78 chemicals we looked for in the survey. The highest
number of chemicals found in any one person was 49 - nearly two thirds (63 per cent) of the
chemicals looked for.
• Every person is contaminated by chemicals from each group: organochlorine pesticides, PCBs
and PBDEs (flame retardants).
• The highest concentration of any chemical found was 2,557 ng/g (ng/g = parts per billion) of
the DDT metabolite p,pí-DDE. The use of DDT was banned in the UK more than 20 years ago.
• The most frequently detected chemicals were PCB congeners 99 and 118 and the DDT
metabolite p,pi-DDE, which were detected in all but one of the 155 volunteers.
• Ten chemicals were found in more than 95 per cent of volunteers (PCB congeners 99, 118,
138, 153, 156, 170, 180, 194, PBDE 153 and the organochlorine pesticides --HCH and p,pi-
DDE).
• This is the first survey to identify the widespread contamination of non-occupationally
exposed people to the deca-BDE brominated flame retardant product. Worryingly, the
highest levels found in our non-occupationally exposed volunteers were very similar to those
observed in Sweden of people occupationally exposed to deca-BDE.
• We are being contaminated daily by ‘unregulated’ chemicals of unknown toxicity, such as the
deca-BDE flame retardant. Since there is a dearth of knowledge on the levels of brominated
flame-retardants in the UK population, it is not possible to determine any trend in
contaminant levels.
• PCB contamination is gradually decreasing from levels found in the UK 10 years ago - which
indicates that strong regulations work.
• Small numbers of people continue to be exposed and contaminated with high levels of
certain chemicals, although median levels of some chemicals are decreasing compared with
some earlier studies.
• Volunteers tested in Nottingham had the highest median level of total chemical
contamination of the chemicals we looked for. They also had the highest median level of
PCBs, organo-chlorine pesticides and of DDT and its metabolites. Further regional findings
are presented in Appendix 1.
• The lifestyle questionnaire identified two factors which significantly affected the level of
contamination of individual chemicals: older people have higher levels of PCBs in their blood;
and women have lower levels of certain PCBs than men and the levels appear to reduce in
relation to the number of children they carried and breast-fed. These differences seem to be
related to women “off-loading” some of their chemical burden to their children.”
In 2016 the European Commission no longer CARES WHERE CHEMICALS END UP: the EU
Commission, EFSA and the UK government are colluding with the Pesticides Industry
The measure of public suspicion in Europe was such that the EU Commission received more
than 1.5 million citizen petitions demanding they not approve glyphosate.
When it was clear that some European Commissioners were secretly planning to re-approve
it for 15 years, veteran US journalist William Engdahl reported in an article: The Amazing
7
Glyphosate Revolt Grows:14 “To date the EU Commission has received a staggering 1.5
million citizen petitions demanding they not re-approve glyphosate. The opposition to EU
Commission approval of glyphosate has taken on a self-expanding character and that has the
agribusiness weed-killer cartel alarmed. The process is exposing to the general public, for the
first time in such a clear manner, the degree of corruption in not only Brussels but also in the
so-called scientific bodies that advise it on what is safe and what not. … So a group of
manifestly immoral scientists (Boobis & Moretto) led the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on
Pesticide Residues (JMPR).” Vito Buonsante, a lawyer for the ClientEarth group, in reference
to the suspiciously-timed FAO/WHO report stated, “There is a clear conflict of interest here if
the review of the safety of glyphosate is carried out by scientists that directly get money from
industry.”
When did WWF-UK finally bow to the pressure of the industry?
Two thousand and three was undoubtedly the last biological monitoring for pesticides done
on people in the UK. Was it as a result of pressure from the industry and the Advertising
Standards Agency? There have been many more studies in Europe of glyphosate (the most
widely used herbicide) residues in food and drink, animals and humans.
Fourteen German beers contain glyphosate residues 15
“The Munich Environmental Institute (Umweltinstitut München) released shocking results
on 25/02/2016 of laboratory testing it has completed on 14 of the most sold beers in
Germany. The probable carcinogen and World’s most used herbicide – glyphosate – was
found in all of the 14 beers tested.”
Studies in Danish dairy cattle16 found glyphosate residues and changes in blood
parameters
• Glyphosate in the urine
• Blood parameter indicative of cytotoxicity (Increased alkaline phosphatase (AP),
glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH), glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase (GOT),
creatinine kinase CK)
• Signs of nephrotoxicity (raised urea and creatine)
• Increased serum cholesterol
• Trace elements: very low levels of manganese and cobalt
Survey of glyphosate residues in the urine of German citizens
It was published in March 2016 and funded by the Heinrich Böll Foundation. “According to
the study, 99.6% of the 2,009 German citizens monitored have some level of glyphosate
found in their urine. Over 75% of these individuals have concentrations that are higher than
the EU’s legal level for glyphosate in drinking water. Further, children up to age 19 are found
to exhibit higher levels of urinary glyphosate than older adults. Individuals living near
agricultural areas also show elevated concentrations compared to those that did not.” 17
When did WWF-UK change? Could it have been with the appointment of Robert Napier as
Chief Executive Officer in 2004?
14
http://journal-neo.org/2016/05/23/the-amazing-glyphosate-revolt-grows/
15
http://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/25/german-beer-industry-in-shock-over-probable-
carcinogen-glyphosate-contamination/#.V_ZMDRSFDzI
16
http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2161-0525.1000186
17
http://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2016/03/study-finds-majority-of-germans-have-
glyphosate-in-their-bodies/
8
“Napier had spent most of his career working for environmental despoilers, took over the
running the UK arm of the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).18 It was a surprising choice.
'It's like putting King Herod in charge of a crèche,' said one commentator. But with the
corporate world becoming ever more sophisticated in its relations with the environmental
movement, the fund wanted someone who could talk on level terms with the City.”
On Linked-In Glyn Davies states:
Since 2005, I have increasingly engaged with corporates on CSR (? Corporate Social
Responsibility, referring to business ethics) agenda: BBOP, HSBC, M&S, Coca-Cola-GB. In all
situations I am focused on delivering change, through science, advocacy and campaigns.
WWF-UK stopped bio-monitoring in 2005/2006 and stopped working on chemicals 2007
That was why CHEM Trust was set up in 2007. Protecting Humans and Wildlife from Harmful
Chemicals.19
“CHEM Trust is a UK based charity, working at UK, EU and International level. It’s worth
noting that many aspects of chemical regulation within the UK are actually controlled at EU
level, with the UK government and MEPs participating in decisions. This means that CHEM
Trust’s work at EU level has a direct impact on the UK.”
WWF-US statement on Monsanto
“WWF does not have a partnership or any formal relationship with Monsanto. WWF is
committed to achieving zero net deforestation and forest degradation and has played a key
role alongside other NGOs to establish and maintain the soy moratorium to combat
deforestation in the Amazon (and Cerrado). WWF co-founded the Roundtable on Responsible
Soy (RTRS), a multi-stakeholder initiative to encourage environmentally, socially and
economically sound soy production. Monsanto is a member of the RTRS, and a prominent
actor in genetically modified soy production, but their membership does not mean that WWF
endorses their position or actions. We believe that being part of the RTRS to develop
standards with other stakeholders will have a much greater impact than refusing to
participate and so we will continue to do so. Moreover, we maintain the precautionary
principle to use of GMOs.”
How WWF works with business20
WWF justifies why and how it works with corporations. “Whether through direct operations
or supply chains, business depends on natural resources. It needs energy. WWF works
directly with companies and through industry-specific roundtables and platforms to reduce
the ecological footprint of doing business, and to help the private sector be better stewards
of shared natural assets.
We also advocate for policies and regulations that promote sustainability and protect
people’s rights.”
WWF International’s Corporate Partnership Report for the fiscal year 2015
On the second page it makes these statements:21
18
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/jan/11/business.conservationandendangeredspeci
es
19
http://www.chemtrust.org.uk
20
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/how_we_work/businesses/
21
http://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/2015_corporate_engagement_wwf_int_final_1.p
df
9
“WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation
organizations, with over 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than 100
countries.
WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a
future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s biological
diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting
the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.”
PandaLeaks: The dark side of WWF: The description of the book and the author. 22
“The WWF, renowned global nature conservancy brand, greenwashes the ecological crimes
of corporations currently destroying the last remaining rain forests and natural habitats on
earth; and it accepts their money. This business model of the famous “eco” organization
does more to harm nature than to protect it.
The WWF cannot refute the facts gathered by esteemed journalist and filmmaker Wilfried
Huismann during his two-year research expedition to all corners of the green empire. A
journalistic tour de force unearthing the grim secrets behind the warm and cuddly façade of
the WWF, Huismann’s exposé went straight to the German bestseller list. The book is now
available in English, unabridged and updated.
Huismann also dug deep into the early history of the world’s most powerful nature
conservancy organization and found several skeletons in the closet: the elite secret club
known as “The 1001” and a private military commando unit deployed in Africa against big
game poachers – and against black African liberation movements. In the name of
environmental protection the WWF has participated in the displacement and cultural
extinction of indigenous peoples the world over.”
“It paints the picture of an environmental organization rubbing elbows with industry; doing
deals with the rich and powerful, the oil companies and GMO mafia, forgetting its goals and
even losing its identity in the process.”
Review by –Süddeutsche Zeitung-: This South German newspaper, founded in 1945,
published in Munich, Bavaria, it is the largest German national subscription daily newspaper.
The newspaper in conjunction with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists
reviewed the data from the Panama Papers for over a year before publishing it on 3 April
2016. Unlike the UK media, it is independent from government and not controlled by Media
Corporations.
WWF accused of facilitating human rights abuse23
Complaints from Survival International:24 Survival International has launched a formal
complaint about the activities of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in Cameroon.
“This is the first time a conservation organization has been the subject of a complaint to the
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), using a procedure more
normally invoked against multinational corporations”, Survival International writes.
The complaint charges WWF with involvement in violent abuse and land theft against Baka
“Pygmies” in Cameroon, carried out by anti-poaching squads which it in part funds and
equips.25
The UK and WWF could appear in the International Criminal Court in The Hague together26
22
http://www.pandaleaks.org
23
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/03/wwf-accused-of-facilitating-human-
rights-abuses-of-tribal-people-in-cameroon
24
http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/11276
25
http://www.pandaleaks.org/wwf-accused-involvement-in-violence-and-abuse/
10
The International Criminal Court in The Hague announced a change in remit.27
On 15/09/2016 John Vidal and Owen Bowcutt for The Guardian: “Environmental destruction
(Britain) and land-grabs (WWF International) could lead to governments and individuals
being prosecuted for crimes against humanity by the international criminal court following a
decision to expand its remit.”
The Monsanto Tribunal to be held next week: 14-16 October in The Hague
The Monsanto Tribunal is an international civil society initiative to hold Monsanto
accountable for human rights violations, for crimes against humanity, and for ecocide.
Eminent judges will hear testimonies from victims, and deliver an advisory opinion following
procedures of the International Court of Justice. A parallel People's Assembly provides the
opportunity for social movements to rally and plan for the future we want. The Tribunal and
People's Assembly will take place between 14 and 16 October 2016 in The Hague,
Netherlands.
Rosemary Mason MB, ChB FRCA
08/10/2016
Appendix
The Monsanto Tribunal: www.monsanto-tribunal.org
Program Monsanto Tribunal
Location: Institute of Social Studies, Kortenaerkade 12, 2518 AX Den Haag. Scroll down for
the PDF version and the People's Assembly program
October 14th, 2016 Opening of the Monsanto Tribunal. For more information, please scroll
down to the agenda of the People’s Assembly.
October 15th, 2016
8:00-8:30 Registration of the visitors: please be in time!
8:30-8:45 Opening with Corinne Lepage, member of the Organizing Committee, former
French Minister for the Environment & Member of the European Parliament
Hearings of the victims and their lawyers 8:45 – 12:45
• Impact on human health
8:45-9:15 Sabine GRATALOUP, Maria Liz ROBLEDO, RoundUp victim, France, Argentina
9:15-9:45 Christine SHEPPHARD, victim RoundUp & Timothy LITZENBURG, lawyer, USA
9:45-10:15 Kolon SAMAN & Channa JAYASUMANA, victim and environmental health expert,
Sri Lanka
10:15-10:45 Coffee break
10:45-11:15 Damian VERZEÑASSI, doctor public health, Argentina
11:15-11:45 Marcelo FIRPO, Public Health & Environmental Health researcher, ABRASCO,
Brazil
• Impact on soils and plants
11:45-12:10 Diego FERNANDEZ, farmer, Argentina
12:10-12:35 Don HUBER, biologist, USA
12:45-14:15 Lunch break
26
https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=pr1238
27
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2016/sep/15/hague-court-widens-remit-to-include-
environmental-destruction-cases
11
14:15 – 18:45
• Impact on animal health
14:15-14:40 Art DUNHAM, veterinary, USA
14:40-15:05 Monika KRUEGER, scientist, Germany
15:05-15:30 Ib Borup PEDERSEN, pig farmer, Denmark
• Impact on biodiversity
15:50-16:05 Feliciano UCAN POOT, Angelica EL CANCHE, beekeepers, María Colin, lawyer,
Mexico
16:05-16:30 Steve MARSH, GMO contamination, Australia
16:30-17:00: Coffee break
• Impact on farmers and the right to food
17:00-17:25 Ousmane TIENDREBEOGO, GMO Cotton, Burkina Faso
17:25 -17:50 Kishan BIR CHAUDHARY, scientist, India
17:50-18:15 Farida AKTHER, GMO eggplant, Bangladesh
18:15-18:40 Percy SCHMEISER, IPR/patents, Canada
October 16th, 2016
9:00 – 13:00
• Pressures on stakeholders and institutions
9:00-9:25 Pedro PABLO MUTUMBAJOY, victim Plan Colombia
9:25-9:50 Paul FRANCOIS, Lasso victim, France
9:50-10:15 Juan Ignacio PEREYRA, victims of crop spraying lawyer, Argentina
10:15-10:45 Miguel LOVERA, Expert on health, Paraguay
10.45-11.15 Coffee break
11.15-11.40 Gilles Eric SERALINI, academic research, France
11.40-12.05 Shiv CHOPRA, expert regulatory agency, Canada
12.05-12.30 Claire ROBINSON, academic research, United Kingdom
12.30-13.00 Peter CLAUSING, toxicologist, Germany.
14:30 – 17:00
14:30-15:00 Lawyer of the Monsanto Tribunal, Claudia Gómez Godoy, Right to healthy
environment, health and food
15:00-15:30 Lawyer of the Monsanto Tribunal, William Bourdon, Right to information
15:30-16:00 Coffee break
16:00-16:30 Lawyer of the Monsanto Tribunal, Maogato Jackson, War Crimes
16:30-17:15 Lawyer of the Monsanto Tribunal, Gwynn McCarrick & Koffi Dogbevi, Ecocide
17:15-17:30 Closing of the International Monsanto Tribunal
Agenda People’s Assembly
Location: Bazaar of Ideas (next to the Student Hotel) - Hoefkade 9, 2526 BN Den Haag
Scroll down to download the PDF version
October 14th, 2016
10:00 - 11:00 Registration - please be on time
11:00 - 12:00 Press Conference
Marie-Monique Robin, Vandana Shiva, Hans Herren, André Leu, Ronnie Cummins, Corinne
Lepage, Valérie Cabanes, Renate Künast, Nnimmo Bassey.
12:00 - 13:30 Lunch
13:30 - 15:30 Opening session: A Century of Ecocide and Genocide
• 13:30-13:35 Opening remarks
• 13:35-14:30 Owning Life: Vandana Shiva (Navdanya) - Patents on Seed and the attempt to
“own” life; Percy Schmeiser (Canadian farmer sued by Monsanto) - Farmers vs.
Monsanto; Fernando Cabaleiro (Argentina) - Citizen Coalition against Monsanto’s
12
claims to Patents on Life.
• 14:30-16:00 Poisoning Life: André Leu (President IFOAM International) - Why are they
poisoning our children?; Hans Herren (Chair IAASTD and Biovision Institute) -
Farming without pesticides; Stephanie Seneff (Senior Research Scientist) - Toxics and
Autism; Marcelo Firpo (Environmental Health researcher - ABRASCO – Brazil) -
Health effects of pesticide contamination in Brazil; Francois Veillerette (Pesticides
Action Network) - pesticides in people: a widespread contamination that threatens
the health of present and future generations.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee break
• 16:30-18:00 Attack on Farmers and Farming: Nnimmo Bassey, Health of Mother Earth
Foundation (Nigeria); Charito Medina, MASIPAG (Philipines); Farida Akhter, UBINIG
(Bengladesh); Ali Tapsoba, C.C.A.E. (Burkina Faso); Nivia Silva, MST Brazil (La Via
Campesina); Xiulin Gu (China).
• 18:00-19:00 Attack on science and scientists: Claire Robinson, editor GMwatch.org and
co-author of the book GMO myths and truths; Shiv Chopra, Scientist and author of
the book Corrupted to the core; Gilles-Eric Séralini, Professor and founder of CRIIGEN
19:00 - 20:00 Dinner
20:00 - 21:30 Theater, music, films & drinks
October 15th, 2016
10:00 - 10:10 Order of the Day
10:00 - 12:15 Workshop Session 1
Each workshop starts with a short introduction by expert followed by interaction between
participants towards action plan. Scroll down to the bottom of the page for the detailed
workshop program.
• How to ban GMOs worldwide
• Ideas to ban Pesticides and toxic chemicals
• Steps towards Seed Freedom
• Steps to hold transnationational corporations responsible for their acts
• Promoting agroecology to feed the world
12:15 - 14:00 Lunch
14:00 - 16:00 Workshop session 2
16:00 - 16:45 Coffee break
16:30 - 17:45 Reports from workshops 17:45 - 18:00 Music: Murga 18:00 - 19:00 Attack on
Democracy and Laws that protect the planet and our food freedom
• Ronnie Cummins (Organic Consumers Association) - GMO Labelling and the US DARK Act;
Nina Holland (Corporate Europe Observatory) - Monsanto’s lobbying tools and
tricks; Bart Staes (European Greens) - How agrochemical lobbies try to overtake EU-
regulation and decision making
19:00-20:00 New Corporate Strategies for extending control over our seed, food and
planet
• Antonius Michelman (Bayer Co-ordination, Germany) - Facing The Monsanto-Bayer
Merger; Vandana Shiva (Navdanya) - The poison cartel, Bill Gates and new attempts
to control our seed and food; Monica Di Sisto (Fairwatch) - TTIP and Free Trade
Agreements; Jim Thomas (ETC Group) - The new technologies of corporate control.
20:00 - 21:00 Dinner
21:00 - 22:30 Music, films & drinks
October 16th, 2016
10:00 - 10:10 Order of the day
10:15 - 11.15 Workshop Session 3 - Concrete Actions and Coalitions
11:15 - 12:15 Results from Workshops
12:15 - 14:00 Lunch
13
14:00 - 17:45 Closing session: People’s vision and Actions for the future of food and the
future of the planet
• 14:00-15:30 Renate Künast - Right to safe and healthy food; André Leu (IFOAM
International) - Organic Agriculture and Poison Free food; Ronnie Cummins
(Regeneration International) - From Degeneration to Regeneration; Hans Herren
(Biovision) - Agro ecology nourishes the world; Rachel Parent (Kids Right to Know) -
Rights of future generations
15:30 - 16:00 Coffee break
• 16:00-17:30 Brid Brennan (Transnational Institute) - Dismantling Corporate Power and
building People’s Sovereignty; Miryam Gorban - The Future of Food Sovereignty;
Valérie Cabanes (End Ecocide) - End Ecocide; Vandana Shiva (Navdanya) - Sowing the
Seeds of Earth Democracy
• 17:30-17:45 Collective Launch of Global Participatory Declaration for the future of food
and future of the planet and sharing of biodiversity
17:45-18:00 Drinks & music
19.00 Dinner for organisation & guests with invitation
