On 17 June 2026, the European Parliament sealed a decision that would forever change the face of European agriculture and affect the safety of the food marketplace and consumers. After long years of opaque negotiations and returns, EU decision-makers voted in favour of the proposal for a complete deregulation of genetically modified plants through fresh genomic techniques (NGT). Is this a "attack" on the rights of consumers and citizens?
The results of this vote do not leave any illusions about the current policy in Brussels.
As many as 431 MEPs advocated deregulation, only 201 were against and 29 parliamentarians abstained.
Interests of large business YES, rights of citizens and consumers NO
The decision of the European Union shows a strong departure from the policy so far supporting the interests of tiny farmers, consumers and tiny and medium-sized seed enterprises.
It is besides a departure from the precautionary principle, which has so far favoured not taking risky steps until we have examined all the consequences of the decision, especially in the interests of the citizens of the Union.
They'll take distant our right to choose? In May, it will be decided whether we will eat GMOs Luke Janko
With this 1 decision, the European Union has confirmed its change of strategy and has seemingly given up food sovereignty on our continent, sacrificing the GMO-free agriculture sector to corporations.
The government voted in June abolishes the existing requirements for the release of GMO plants into the environment in Europe, which were strictly regulated by the 2001 EU Directive. While supporters of change show that the fresh rules do not apply to GMOs, only to NGT, many social and consumer organisations indicate that this is mediocre consolation for consumers and that their right to information and sovereign decision will in fact be violated.
We compose about people, not power.
We show the fact about causes, not consequences. We are your voice. Support independence!
Donate and become our contributor
These stringent restrictions, which warrant a clear labeling and full traceability of food products, have so far been achieved only in the beginning of the century through the massive European mobilisation of citizens, independent farmers and European NGOs fighting for consumer and civilian rights.
Today, this foundation of our safety is deliberately destroyed. Voting in Europe is de facto giving power to multinational seed companies and biotechnology. They have for many years been pushing the abolition of restrictions to impose on Europe their patent-based agricultural model.
Patents – a hidden monopoly tool?
It was the issue of patents that was the centre and the most important, silent point of the negotiations, while raising the top and full justified concerns of independent farmers and tiny farmers.
Currently, only a fistful of plants obtained with NGT are on the market, and their expected miraculous benefits for sustainable improvement are inactive uncertain.
However, it is certain that most of these innovative techniques are subject to or will be subject to strict patent law.
In the opinion of many experts and observers, the extremist removal of the traceability request for fresh GMOs can origin patents to grow uncontrollablely into conventional conventionally grown plants.
However, the European Parliament seems to have ignored the concerns of agricultural and social communities and rejected a package of key amendments aimed at clarifying European patent law in relation to the EU Directive. These changes in the opinion of many experts were absolutely essential to defend farmers and smaller national companies from lawsuits for infringement of patents. specified processes can occur, for example, in the event of an entirely accidental contamination of crops.
New GMOs. Do we request more red carrots? French report: you can see the danger, you can't see the benefit Rafał Górski, Sonia Priwiew
Slovakia “on the front line” fighting for the right to choose
The current plans in Slovakia are a signal to resistance. Government authorities there plan to bring a formal complaint to the EU Court of Justice against the June deregulation of fresh GMOs.
The Slovak Minister of Agriculture, Richard Takac, is already in possession of a strong appeal to take specified extremist steps, under which many valued scientists and crucial European NGOs have signed. Moreover, there is simply a unique cross-party consensus in this country. The best evidence of this is that all Slovak MEPs, regardless of political affiliation, have jointly voted against the implementation of the fresh rules.
According to many legal experts, the appeal planned by Slovakia may have a solid substantive basis.
The justification clearly indicates a drastic breach of the fundamental precautionary rule (which is formally inactive in force in the Union) and a direct attack on the consumer's right to a conscious choice and reliable information about the food they scope the store shelves. Moreover, the fresh EU law completely ignores the final judgement of the 2018 TEU itself, which regulates the restrictive legal position of fresh genomic techniques. The law is not so simple.
How did Poland vote?
The vote on deregulation (variously from Slovakia) showed a clear division among Polish political forces. Polish MEPs have not developed a common position on this issue.
Most representatives of the Polish governing coalition voted in favour of beginning the European marketplace to fresh GMOs. Euro MPs from the Citizens' Coalition and the 3rd Way (both PSL and Poland 2050) who are members of the EPP and Renew factions in the European Parliament expressed support for the fresh legislation. Similarly, part of the Confederate politicians belonging to the ESN faction besides voted.
In turn, the delegation of Law and Justice (the EHR faction) and another part of the Confederacy's deputies (the PfE faction) were almost entirely against deregulation. The opposition to the regulation was besides expressed jointly and severally by representatives of the Polish Left (S&D faction), voting differently from the remainder of the national coalition. There was besides a abstaining vote from the Polish Euro MP sitting in a group of non-attached (NI) Members – Grzegorz Braun.
What's next for European agriculture?
The civilian Affairs Institute has been consistently on the side of citizens for years, fighting for the right to reliable information. However, today, in the face of the deregulation of fresh GMOs voted in Brussels, the question arises – whose voice truly matters in the European Union and why are the profits of global corporations higher than the wellness of millions of citizens of the European Union, including Poland?
In the face of these changes, it remains highly uncertain how the future of European agriculture will unfold and whether the actions announced by the associate States, specified as Slovakia, will be able to halt the entry into force of controversial rules.
The question besides remains what about the sovereignty of European agriculture, which has so far been a crucial component in building the European economy.
