VZCZCXRO5888
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
DE RUEHFR #7802 3481641
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 141641Z DEC 06 ZDK
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3800
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES
RUEHMRE/AMCONSUL MARSEILLE 1466
RUEHSR/AMCONSUL STRASBOURG 0272
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 2558
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC

UNCLAS PARIS 007802 
 
SIPDIS 
 
BRUSSELS PASS USEU FOR AGMINCOUNSELOR 
STATE FOR OES; EUR/ERA AND EB(SPIRNAK); 
STATE PASS USTR FOR MURPHY; 
USDA/OS/JOHANNS/TERPSTRA; 
USDA/FAS FOR OA/YOST; 
OCRA/CURTIS 
STA/SIMMONS/JONES/HENNEY 
FAA/YOUNG; 
EU POSTS PASS TO AGRICULTURE AND ECON 
GENEVA FOR USTR, ALSO AGRICULTURE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ETRD EU FR
SUBJECT: GOF TO BE CONDEMNED BY EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE 
 
REF: (A) PARIS 506, (B) PARIS 2439 
 
¶1.  On December 12, the EU Commission proposed that the European 
Court of Justice (ECJ) fine the GOF a lump sum of 38 million euros 
and a daily penalty of 366,744 euros for not transposing EU 
Directive 2001/18 (the EU legal framework on the deliberate release 
of biotech products into the environment) into national law on time. 
 
 
History of the French Biotech Bill 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  Since adoption of EU Directive 2001/18, the GOF has grappled 
with how and when to transpose it into French law. The GOF opted for 
a wide biotech bill, which would not only transpose the Directive, 
but also set a framework for biotech/non-biotech coexistence rules 
in France.  This ambitious project was first announced by President 
Chirac in October 2004, when a Parliamentary working group on 
biotech was created.  In April 2005, this group released its final 
report including recommendations on the bill.  On February 2006, the 
French Minister of Research presented a bill to the Senate (REF A), 
which adopted a text in March (REF B). 
 
¶3.  Since its vote by the French Senate in March, a biotech bill 
transposing the EU Directive has languished in the National Assembly 
for political reasons.  The GOF failed to force this issue to a vote 
in view of upcoming Presidential and Parliamentary elections of 
Spring 2007. 
 
Reaction of the GOF to the EC Decision 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶4.  However, in view of the December 12 announcement by the EU 
Commission, the GOF seems to be seriously reconsidering and may 
schedule a vote on the biotech bill by the National Assembly before 
its election recess, i.e., February 22, 2007. 
 
¶5.  The Associated Press and Reuters, as well as the French weekly 
newspaper "Le Nouvel Observateur" reported that the GOF spokesman 
said yesterday that "the biotech bill will be adopted by the end of 
the current legislature," as "it must and will be."  According to 
the press, the GOF spokesman stated that the review of the bill by 
the National Assembly "will not take more than two or three days," 
especially since some decrees have already been drafted by the 
Ministries involved. 
 
¶6.  Comment: Given the highly-charged political atmosphere, the GOF 
may have intentionally waited for the Commission to exert pressure 
for transposing the EU Directive.  While both supporters and 
detractors of ag biotech call for a clear legal framework as set out 
in the form of this bill, in view of the upcoming elections, a 
review and vote on the bill by the National Assembly is expected to 
be very tense.  End comment. 
 
 
Stapleton