Human rights activists on the use of glyphosate: Complaint against Bayer to the OECD

Deforestation, land displacement, glyphosate in drinking water: human rights organizations accuse the Bayer Group of failing to fulfill its responsibility for the use of genetically modified soy and glyphosate – and are filing a complaint with the OECD.

For the first time, an international group of human rights organizations is filing a complaint against the Bayer Group for violating the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The company is accused of failing to fulfill its responsibility for the use of glyphosate and the use of GM soya.

The guidelines of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) were adopted in 2011 and, among other things, stipulate that companies active abroad should analyze the risks when using their products and prevent damage. Bayer publicly commits to complying with these rules.

Complaints of nausea and breathing problems

In the complaint text, the rbb24 research Exclusively available, the case of Sabrina Ortiz in Pergamino, Argentina, among others, is documented. Ortiz lived near huge soybean fields. After the pesticides were applied, residents complained of nausea, breathing problems and skin rashes. Ortiz showed symptoms of poisoning in 2011 and had a miscarriage. Their children also suffer from serious problems such as cysts. Urine tests revealed high levels of glyphosate in them. The case went to court in Argentina, where further reports suggested a connection between the illnesses and pesticide exposure.

Bayer objects rbb-Inquiry. The specific case from Argentina is not known there and it does not fit the “product and safety profile of glyphosate, which is one of the best-studied crop protection products in the world.”

An Argentine court ruled in favor of Ortiz and in 2019 set distance rules of at least 1,095 meters for the application of pesticides. On medical advice, she moved away from her hometown, which is surrounded by soybean fields.

Bayer points out Training program

Bayer has not fulfilled its responsibility for the use of the GM soy and glyphosate it offers to the extent required by the OECD guidelines, says Christian Schliemann-Radbruch, lawyer and head of the Business and Human Rights program at the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR): “One point is also that companies have to take care of what happens if their products are misused.” The situation on site has been reported on for 20 years and it is therefore clearly foreseeable that such damage would occur – “and so far we have not seen that integrated into the company’s concrete practice at all,” said Schliemann-Radbruch.

Bayer points out rbb-Inquiry about its training program for the safe use of pesticides: “In Latin America alone, we reached 300,000 farmers with training last year. If we receive information that indicates improper use, we follow up consistently.”

Effects of glyphosate controversial

One person who has been warning for years about the health damage caused by the massive use of pesticides is Damian Verzeñassi, a professor of medicine at the University of Rosario in Argentina. He evaluated health data from 130,000 people who live in close proximity to GM soy fields and found that younger people had a noticeably high number of cases of cancer as well as respiratory diseases and thyroid and fertility problems. “The health problems only began in the late 1090s, when the massive use of pesticides began in Argentina,” explains Verzeñassi.

The effects of glyphosate and other added chemicals are controversial worldwide. Bayer writes in his reply to rbb, “that glyphosate is safe and non-carcinogenic when used appropriately.” This has been confirmed by leading health and regulatory authorities such as those in the EU and the USA.

Cultivation of GM soy under criticism

But the complaint now filed against Bayer is not just about the health effects of glyphosate, but also about the social and ecological consequences of the agricultural model that Bayer’s subsidiary Monsanto tried to implement worldwide from the 1990s.

This is based on the cultivation of glyphosate-resistant GM soya and the resulting possible massive use of glyphosate to combat weeds. The chemical company essentially sold both products as a package. In Bolivia, Bayer dominated 67 percent (2019) of the market, and in Brazil, the world’s most important soy exporter, it is 44 percent.

The spread of land-intensive GM soy cultivation set in motion a double displacement process: According to estimates, by 2017, more than two million hectares of forest – roughly the area of ​​Rhineland-Palatinate – were cleared in southern South America every year to make room for the cultivation of genetically modified soy .

Bayer: GM soy cultivation is not the reason for deforestation

In addition, monocultures are displacing small-scale agriculture, which no longer has much access to land or only to land that has been contaminated with glyphosate. “Indigenous communities can then often no longer grow enough and have to buy food on the market for which they do not have the money. This then translates into a clear violation of their human rights, i.e. the right to food or the right to land,” says Schliemann -Wheel broken from ECCHR.

Here too, Bayer contradicts the complainants and does not see the spread of GM soy as a significant factor in deforestation and the displacement of small farmers: “The consolidation of agriculture is a global process and is completely independent of genetically modified seeds. We have also been observing this phenomenon in Europe for decades , where genetically modified seeds are not permitted.”

According to the organizations’ assessment, small farmers – for example in Paraguay – in the immediate vicinity of GM soya fields also suffer from the accumulation of glyphosate in the soil and water destroying their crops. Because unlike Bayer’s GM soya, their own plants are not resistant to glyphosate and will die.

Human rights activists criticize Glyphosate exposure

In addition, drinking water has been contaminated by glyphosate in several cases. Another problem raised is the loss of biodiversity caused by genetic monocultures and the use of glyphosate. According to Bayer, however, studies show that when the products are used properly, “neither people nor the environment are exposed to an unacceptable risk.”

“What we found in our research is that the problems are very similar in different countries, which shows that these are not isolated cases and that the agricultural model needs to change,” says Daisy Ribeiro from the Brazilian human rights organization Terra de Direitos, which is involved in the complaint against Bayer.

Ministry of Economic Affairs must investigate allegations

A department of the Federal Ministry of Economics must now examine the allegations made against Bayer. If she accepts the complaint, a mediation process will be initiated. “That is our primary goal,” says ECCHR lawyer Schliemann-Radbruch. “In the end, we want to come to the table with Bayer and examine the weak points in its corporate policy together in order to then find out: Okay, where do we actually have to turn the adjustment screw so that so much negative damage doesn’t continue to happen in the four countries?”

According to his wishes, the mediation should also deal with the question of compensation payments for those affected in South America. A legal right to compensation does not derive from the OECD Guidelines.