| | english | español | français |
Go to record ID

  Home|Finding Information|Record details   Printer-friendly version

Second Regular National Report on the Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Record information and status
Record ID
102396
Status
Published
Date of creation
2011-09-30 10:32 UTC (jr.rakotoarijaona@gmail.com)
Date of publication
2011-09-30 10:32 UTC (jr.rakotoarijaona@gmail.com)

This document is also available in the following languages:
Origin of report
Country
  • Madagascar
Contact officer for report
Coordinates
Mme Blandine RAMANANTENASOA
Point Focal du Protocole de Cartagena
Ministère de l'Environnement et des Forêts (MEF)
B.P. 571 Ampandrianomby Antananarivo- 101
Antananarivo, Antananarivo
Madagascar, 101
Phone:+261 34 05 620 34
Fax:+261 20 22 411 91
Email:ramanantenasoamarie@yahoo.fr
Consulted stakeholders
9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report
FR
Ministère d'Etat chargé de l'Economie et de l'Industrie ; Ministère de l'Environnemnent et des Forêts ; Ministère de l'Agriculture ; Ministère de l'Elevage ; Ministère des Finances et du Budget; Ministère de la Santé Publique ;  Ministère de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche Scientifique ; Ministère du Commerce ; Office National pour l'Environnement (ONE) ; Madagascar National Parks (MNP) ; Centre National de Recherche Océanographique (CNRO) ; Silo National des Graines Forestières (SNGF) ; Centre National des Recherches Appliquées au Développement (FOFIFA) ; Conservation International (CI) ; Service d'Appui à la Gestion de l'Environnement (SAGE.
Submission
10. Date of submission
2011-09-30
11. Time period covered by this report
Start date
2007-09-01
Time period covered by this report
End date
2011-09-30
Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
12. Is your country a Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB)?
  • Yes
Article 2 – General provisions
15. Has your country introduced the necessary legal, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the Protocol?
  • A domestic regulatory framework is partially in place
16. Which specific instruments are in place for the implementation of your national biosafety framework?
  • One or more national biosafety regulations
  • Other laws, regulations or guidelines that indirectly apply to biosafety
17. Has your country established a mechanism for the budgetary allocations of funds for the operation of its national biosafety framework?
  • No
18. Does your country have permanent staff to administer functions directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • No
20. Has your country’s biosafety framework / laws / regulations / guidelines been submitted to the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)?
  • Partially
21. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 2 in your country:
FR
Extrait de la Loi N°2011/002 portant Code de la Santé : "Article 48.- Les produits alimentaires d'origine végétale, ayant été mis en culture sous le mode spécifique des Organismes Génétiquement Modifiés appelés OGM, font l'objet d'une déclaration les classant dangereux pour la consommation humaine en raison des risques de modification du génome qu'ils font courir au consommateur. Leur mise en vente au titre de denrée alimentaire est interdite à travers le Territoire National. "
Extrait de la Loi N°028/2008 du 29 Octobre 2008 portant refonte du Code de Gestion des Aires protégées (COAP) : Article 35 (§6) "…Toute activité liée au prélèvement de ressources génétiques ou biologiques devra s'assurer d'un partage juste et équitable des bénéfices conformément à la législation en vigueur."…
Extrait du Décret N° 99-954 du 15 Décembre 1999 modifié par le décret n° 2004-167 du 03 février 2004 relatif à la mise en compatibilité des investissements avec l'environnement (MECIE) - Annexe I : … "Sont soumises à l'étude d'impact environnemental toutes activités citées ci-dessous ou atteignant l'un des  seuils suivants ….Toute introduction de nouvelles espèces, animales ou végétales, ou d'organismes génétiquement modifiés (OGM) sur le territoire national"…
Article 5 – Pharmaceuticals
22. Does your country regulate the transboundary movement, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) which are pharmaceuticals?
  • No
24. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 5 in your country:
FR
---
Article 6 – Transit and Contained use
25. Does your country regulate the transit of LMOs?
  • No
26. Does your country regulate the contained use of LMOs?
  • No
28. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 6 in your country:
FR
---
Articles 7 to 10 – Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) and intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment
29. Has your country adopted law(s) / regulations / administrative measures for the operation of the AIA procedure of the Protocol?
  • No
30. Has your country adopted a domestic regulatory framework consistent with the Protocol regarding the transboundary movement of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • No
31. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions regarding first intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
32. If you answered Yes to question 31, does the mechanism also apply to cases of intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment that were not subject to transboundary movement?
  • Yes
33. Has your country established a mechanism for monitoring potential effects of LMOs that are released into the environment?
  • No
34. Does your country have the capacity to detect and identify LMOs?
  • No
35. Has your country established legal requirements for exporters under its jurisdiction to notify in writing the competent national authority of the Party of import prior to the intentional transboundary movement of an LMO that falls within the scope of the AIA procedure?
  • No
36. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information contained in the notification?
  • No
37. Has your country ever received an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
38. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
39. If you answered Yes to question 38, how many LMOs has your country approved to date for import for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
40. If you answered Yes to question 38, how many LMOs, not imported, has your country approved to date for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • None
41. In the current reporting period, how many applications/notifications has your country received regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
42. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
43. With reference to the decisions taken on intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment, has your country received a notification from the Party(ies) of export or from the exporter(s) prior to the transboundary movement?
  • No
44. Did the notifications contain complete information (at a minimum the information specified in Annex I of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety)?
  • No
45. Has your country acknowledged receipt of the notifications to the notifier within ninety days of receipt?
  • No
46. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s)?
  • No
47. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s) in due time (within 270 days or the period specified in your communication to the notifier)?
  • No
49. In cases where your country approved an import with conditions or prohibited an import, did it provide reasons on which its decisions were based to the notifier and the BCH?
  • Not applicable
50. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Articles 7-10 in your country, including measures in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs for intentional introduction to the environment:
FR
Note explicative concernant nos réponses aux questions 37 à 47: Le seul cas de demande d'autorisation de mouvement transfrontière intentionnel d'OVM aux fins d'introduction intentionnelle dans l'environnement est le cas de la société MERISTEM.
MERISTEM Therapeutics est une société de biotechnologie basée à Clermont-Ferrand (France) travaillant dans la production de plantes (maïs ou tabac) de protéines recombinantes à usage thérapeutique pour l'industrie pharmaceutique. Le 29 novembre 2007, elle fait une demande d'autorisation d'essai de culture transgénique à but thérapeutique à Amboasarianala, commune Anjozorobe, district Anjozorobe auprès du Ministère de l'Agriculture, de l'Elevage et de la Pêche (MAEP). Ce dernier a donné son autorisation le 22 janvier 2008 sous certaines conditions en précisant les caractéristiques de l'OGM, l'objectif de l'introduction et de la culture, la durée de l'autorisation, les informations générales sur les importateurs, l'implantation et la surface concernée, les mesures de préventions, les procédures de suivi de l'essai, les mesures en cas d'apparition d'effet ou d'événement indésirable, la réexpédition de la production et des semences excédentaires et l'engagement du titulaire de l'autorisation. Etant donné que le décret MECIE cité dans la question 21 ci-dessus stipule que toute introduction de nouvelles espèces, animales ou végétales, ou d'organismes génétiquement modifiés (OGM) sur le territoire national est soumise à une étude d'impact environnemental, l'Office National pour l'Environnement (ONE) s'est saisi du dossier et en a informé le Ministère de l'Environnement et des forêts. Celui-ci a consulté le Task Force BCH, constitué des points focaux nationaux du Protocole de Cartagena, les représentants du MAEP, un représentant de la Direction Générale des Douanes, les Gestionnaires du BCH, la Direction de l'évaluation environnementale de l'ONE ainsi que la Cellule environnementale du MAEP. Le task Force a formulé ses remarques et recommandations dans une lettre adressée au Secrétaire Général du Ministère chargé de l'Environnement le 20 mars 2008. Après examen du dossier et consultation du promoteur, Le Task Force a proposé au Ministère de l'Environnement et des Forêts d'ordonner la destruction pure et simple des plants (par exemple par fauchage) et l'élimination de tous les restes d'OGM non semés sur place, stockés ou mis en terre ailleurs. Les principales motivations de cette proposition sont les suivantes : 1) Le promoteur a sciemment contournées les procédures en s'adressant au Ministère chargé de l'agriculture au lieu de l'autorité nationale compétente ; 2) De même, il a tout simplement ignoré la législation nationale concernant la MECIE ; 3) Aucune argumentation sérieuse n'est donnée concernant la décision du promoteur de ne pas faire l'essai chez lui et de le réaliser à Madagascar ; 4) L'évaluation des risques présentée est très sommaire et reste largement insuffisant ; 5) l'OGM objet de la demande est complètement inconnu, aucune information n'est disponible ni sur le BCH ni sur le web; 6) Aucune évaluation crédible n'a été fournie concernant les bénéfices socio-économiques attendus ; 7) Aucune information n'a été communiquée sur le transport effectif de l'OGM (date, les précautions d'emballage, autres mesures de sécurité…) ; 8) Un écart est constaté entre le poids de semences objet de la demande d'importation (150kg) et celui des semences effectivement mises en terre (environ 130 kg). Le Task Force a également noté qu'il était urgent de combler les lacunes graves au niveau du pays en matière de législation et de cadre pour la biosécurité qui ont facilité ce manquement.
Article 11 – Procedure for living modified organisms intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (LMOs-FFP)
51. Has your country adopted specific law(s) or regulation(s) for decision-making regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
52. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?
  • Yes
53. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure that decisions regarding LMOs-FFP that may be subject to transboundary movement will be communicated to the Parties through the BCH?
  • No
54. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions on the import of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
55. Has your country declared through the BCH that in the absence of a regulatory framework its decisions prior to the first import of an LMO-FFP will be taken according to Article 11.6 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • No
56. Has your country indicated its needs for financial and technical assistance and capacity building in respect of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
57. Has your country ever taken a decision on LMOs-FFP (either on import or domestic use)?
  • No
63. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 11 in your country, including measures in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs-FFP:
FR
Extrait de la  Loi n°2011-02 du 15 juillet 2011 portant code de la santé,
"Article 48.- Les produits alimentaires d'origine végétale, ayant été mis en culture sous le mode spécifique des Organismes Génétiquement Modifiés appelés OGM, font l'objet d'une déclaration les classant dangereux pour la consommation humaine en raison des risques de modification du génome qu'ils font courir au consommateur. Leur mise en vente au titre de denrée alimentaire est interdite à travers le Territoire National."
"Article 67, .. Sont soumis à une Etude d'Impact Environnemental :…-  toute introduction de nouvelles espèces, animales ou végétales ou d'Organismes Génétiquement Modifiés (OGM) sur le Territoire National ; "
Madagascar dispose au sein du Ministère chargé de la Santé, d'une Agence de Contrôle de la Sécurité Sanitaire et de la Qualité des Denrées Alimentaires (ACSQDA) veillant à ce que des denrées alimentaires consommées, distribuées, commercialisées ou produites à Madagascar soient conformes aux normes nationales et internationales en vigueur, en matière de sécurité sanitaire et d'hygiène alimentaire.
Mais comme tant d'autres laboratoires de contröle, les agences (phytosanitaire, douanière, de securité alimentaire, ..)  ont besoin de renforcement de capacité
Article 12 – Review of decision
64. Has your country established a mechanism for the review and change of a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
65. Has your country ever received a request for a review of a decision?
  • No
66. Has your country ever reviewed / changed a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
67. In the current reporting period, how many decisions were reviewed and/or changed regarding an intentional transboundary movement of an LMO?
  • None
71. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 12 in your country:
FR
Une structure consultative ponctuelle de reconsideration de l'unique décision, relative au point 50, a été mise en place.
Article 13 – Simplified procedure
72. Has your country established a system for the application of the simplified procedure regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
73. Has your country ever applied the simplified procedure?
  • No
75. In the current reporting period, how many LMOs has your country applied the simplified procedure to?
  • None
76. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 13 in your country:
FR
---
Article 14 – Bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements
77. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements?
  • No
80. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 14 in your country:
FR
---
Article 15 – Risk assessment
81. Has your country established a mechanism for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
82. If you answered Yes to question 81, does this mechanism include procedures for identifying experts to conduct the risk assessments?
  • Yes
83. Has your country established guidelines for how to conduct risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • No
84. Has your country acquired the necessary domestic capacity to conduct risk assessment?
  • No
85. Has your country established a mechanism for training national experts to conduct risk assessments?
  • No
86. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • No
87. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • No
88. If your country has taken decision(s) on LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment or on domestic use of LMOs-FFP, were risk assessments conducted for all decisions taken?
  • Not applicable
89. Has your country submitted summary reports of the risk assessments to the BCH?
  • Not applicable
90. In the current reporting period, if your country has taken decisions regarding LMOs, how many risk assessments were conducted in the context of these decisions?
  • None
91. Has your country ever required the exporter to conduct the risk assessment(s)?
  • No
92. Has your country ever required the notifier to bear the cost of the risk assessment(s) of LMOs?
  • Not applicable
93. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 15 in your country:
FR
Le Décret MECIE cité plus haut et dans son Annexe I exige l'évaluation des risques en soumettant à une étude d'impact environnemental toutes activités d'introduction de nouvelles espèces, animales ou végétales, ou d'organismes génétiquement modifiés (OGM) sur le territoire national.
Article 16 – Risk management
94. Has your country established and maintained appropriate and operational mechanisms, measures and strategies to regulate, manage and control risks identified in risk assessments for:
94.1) LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • No
94.2) LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • No
95. Has your country established and maintained appropriate measures to prevent unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
96. Has your country taken measures to ensure that any LMO, whether imported or locally developed, undergoes an appropriate period of observation that is commensurate with its life-cycle or generation time before it is put to its intended use?
  • No
97. Has your country cooperated with other Parties with a view to identifying LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • No
98. Has your country cooperated with other Parties with a view to taking measures regarding the treatment of LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • No
99. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 16 in your country, including any details regarding risk management strategies, also in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs:
FR
---
Article 17 – Unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures
100. Has your country made available to the BCH the relevant details setting out its point of contact for the purposes of receiving notifications under Article 17?
  • Yes
101. Has your country established a mechanism for addressing emergency measures in case of unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs that are likely to have significant adverse effect on biological diversity?
  • No
102. Has your country implemented emergency measures in response to information about releases that led, or may have led, to unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
103. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country received information concerning occurrences that led, or may have led, to unintentional transboundary movement(s) of one or more LMOs to or from territories under its jurisdiction?
  • Never
107. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 17 in your country:
FR
---
Article 18 – Handling, transport, packaging and identification
108. Has your country taken measures to require that LMOs that are subject to transboundary movement are handled, packaged and transported under conditions of safety, taking into account relevant international rules and standards?
  • No
109. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs-FFP clearly identifies that, in cases where the identity of the LMOs is not known through means such as identity preservation systems, they may contain living modified organisms and are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information?
  • No
110. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs-FFP clearly identifies that, in cases where the identity of the LMOs is known through means such as identity preservation systems, they contain living modified organisms and are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information?
  • No
111. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs that are destined for contained use clearly identifies them as living modified organisms and specifies any requirements for the safe handling, storage, transport and use, the contact point for further information, including the name and address of the individual and institution to whom the LMO are consigned?
  • No
112. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs that are intended for intentional introduction into the environment of the Party of import, clearly identifies them as living modified organisms; specifies the identity and relevant traits and/or characteristics, any requirements for the safe handling, storage, transport and use, the contact point for further information and, as appropriate, the name and address of the importer and exporter; and contains a declaration that the movement is in conformity with the requirements of this Protocol applicable to the exporter?
  • No
113. Does your country have the capacity to enforce the requirements of identification and documentation of LMOs?
  • No
114. Has your country established procedures for the sampling and detection of LMOs?
  • No
115. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 18 in your country:
FR
---
Article 19 – Competent National Authorities and National Focal Points
116. Has your country designated one national focal point for the Cartagena Protocol to be responsible for liaison with the Secretariat?
  • Yes
117. Has your country designated one national focal point for the Biosafety Clearing-House to liaise with the Secretariat regarding issues of relevance to the development and implementation of the BCH?
  • Yes
118. Has your country designated one or more competent national authorities, which are responsible for performing the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and are authorized to act on your country’s behalf with respect to those functions?
  • Yes, one
120. Has your country made available the required information referred in questions 116-119 to the BCH?
  • Yes, all information
122. Has your country established adequate institutional capacity to enable the competent national authority(ies) to perform the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • No
123. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 19 in your country:
FR
---
Article 20 – Information Sharing and the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)
124. Please provide an overview of the status of the information provided by your country to the BCH by specifying for each category of information whether it is available and whether it has been submitted to the BCH.
124.a) Existing national legislation, regulations and guidelines for implementing the Protocol, as well as information required by Parties for the advance informed agreement procedure (Article 20, paragraph 3 (a))
  • Information not available
124.b) National laws, regulations and guidelines applicable to the import of LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 5)
  • Information not available
124.c) Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements (Articles 14, paragraph 2 and 20, paragraph 3 (b))
  • Information not available
124.d) Contact details for competent national authorities (Article 19, paragraphs 2 and 3), national focal points (Article 19, paragraphs 1 and 3), and emergency contacts (Article 17, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.e) Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.f) Decisions by a Party on regulating the transit of specific living modified organisms (LMOs) (Article 6, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.g) Occurrence of unintentional transboundary movements that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity (Article 17, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.h) Illegal transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 25, paragraph 3)
  • Information not available
124.i) Final decisions regarding the importation or release of LMOs (i.e. approval or prohibition, any conditions, requests for further information, extensions granted, reasons for decision) (Articles 10, paragraph 3 and 20, paragraph 3(d))
  • Information not available
124.j) Information on the application of domestic regulations to specific imports of LMOs (Article 14, paragraph 4)
  • Information not available
124.k) Final decisions regarding the domestic use of LMOs that may be subject to transboundary movement for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.l) Final decisions regarding the import of LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing that are taken under domestic regulatory frameworks (Article 11, paragraph 4) or in accordance with annex III (Article 11, paragraph 6) (requirement of Article 20, paragraph 3(d))
  • Information not available
124.m) Declarations regarding the framework to be used for LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 6)
  • Information not available
124.n) Review and change of decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 12, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.o) LMOs granted exemption status by each Party (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.p) Cases where intentional transboundary movement may take place at the same time as the movement is notified to the Party of import (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.q) Summaries of risk assessments or environmental reviews of LMOs generated by regulatory processes and relevant information regarding products thereof (Article 20, paragraph 3 (c))
  • Information not available
125. Has your country established a mechanism for strengthening the capacity of the BCH National Focal Point to perform its administrative functions?
  • Yes
126. Has your country established a mechanism for the coordination among the BCH National Focal Point, the Cartagena Protocol focal point, and the competent national authority(ies) for making information available to the BCH?
  • Yes
127. Does your country use the information available in the BCH in its decision making processes on LMOs?
  • No
128. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?
  • Yes
129. If you answered Yes to question 128, has your country reported these problems to the BCH or the Secretariat?
  • Yes
130. Is the information submitted by your country to the BCH complete and up-to date?
  • No
131. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country:
FR
Question 128: problème lié à la faible connectivité/accès à l'internet.
Article 21 – Confidential information
132. Has your country established procedures to protect confidential information received under the Protocol?
  • No
133. Does your country allow the notifier to identify information that is to be treated as confidential?
  • No
134. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 21 in your country:
FR
---
Article 22 – Capacity-building
135. Has your country received external support or benefited from collaborative activities with other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
136. If you answered Yes to question 135, how were these resources made available?
  • Multilateral channels
137. Has your country provided support to other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • No
139. Is your country eligible to receive funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF)?
  • Yes
140. Has your country ever initiated a process to access GEF funds for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Yes
141. If you answered Yes to question 140, how would you characterize the process?
Please add further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds under question 150.
  • Average
142. Has your country ever received funding from the GEF for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Development of national biosafety frameworks
  • Implementation of national biosafety frameworks
  • Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase I)
  • Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase II)
143. During the current reporting period, has your country undertaken activities for the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
144. If you answered Yes to question 143, in which of the following areas were these activities undertaken?
  • Institutional capacity
  • Human resources capacity development and training
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Information exchange and data management including participation in the Biosafety Clearing-House
145. During the current reporting period, has your country carried out a capacity-building needs assessment?
  • No
146. Does your country still have capacity-building needs?
  • Yes
147. If you answered Yes to question 146, indicate which of the following areas still need capacity-building.
  • Institutional capacity
  • Human resources capacity development and training
  • Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
  • Risk management
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Information exchange and data management including participation in the Biosafety Clearing-House
  • Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
  • Technology transfer
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Socio-economic considerations
  • Implementation of the documentation requirements under Article 18.2 of the Protocol
  • Handling of confidential information
  • Measures to address unintentional and/or illegal transboundary movements of LMOs
  • Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
  • Taking into account risks to human health
148. Has your country developed a capacity-building strategy or action plan?
  • No
149. Has your country submitted the details of national biosafety experts to the Roster of Experts in the BCH?
  • No
150. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 22 in your country, including further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds:
FR
---
Article 23 – Public awareness and participation
151. Has your country established a strategy or put in place legislation for promoting and facilitating public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?
  • No
153. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure public access to information on living modified organisms that may be imported?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
154. Has your country established a mechanism to consult the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
155. Has your country established a mechanism to make available to the public the results of decisions taken on LMOs?
  • No
156. Has your country taken any initiative to inform its public about the means of public access to the Biosafety Clearing-House?
  • Yes
157. In the current reporting period, has your country promoted and facilitated public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
158. If you answered Yes to question 157, has your country cooperated with other States and international bodies?
  • No
159. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country consulted the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs and made the results of such decisions available to the public?
  • None
160. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 23 in your country:
FR
---
Article 24 – Non-Parties
161. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreement with non-Parties regarding transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
162. Has your country ever imported LMOs from a non-Party?
  • No
163. Has your country ever exported LMOs to a non-Party?
  • No
167. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 24 in your country:
FR
---
Article 25 – Illegal transboundary movements
168. Has your country adopted domestic measures aimed at preventing and/or penalizing transboundary movements of LMOs carried out in contravention of its domestic measures to implement this Protocol?
  • No
169. Has your country established a strategy for detecting illegal transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
170. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country received information concerning cases of illegal transboundary movements of an LMO to or from territories under its jurisdiction?
  • Less than 5
171. Has your country informed the BCH and the other Party(ies) involved?
  • No
172. Has your country established the origin of the LMO(s)?
  • Yes
173. Has your country established the nature of the LMO(s)?
  • Yes
174. Has your country established the circumstances of the illegal transboundary movement(s)?
  • No
175. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country:
FR
---
Article 26 – Socio-economic considerations
176. If your country has taken a decision on import, has it ever taken into account socio-economic considerations arising from the impact of the LMO on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • Not applicable
177. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?
  • No
178. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 26 in your country:
FR
---
Article 27 – Liability and Redress
179. Has your country signed the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?
  • Yes
180. Has your country initiated steps towards ratification, acceptance or approval of the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol?
  • Yes
181. Here you may provide further details on any activities undertaken in your country towards the implementation of the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress:
FR
Madagascar a signé le Protocole additionnel Nagoya-Kuala-Lumpur sur la responsabilité et réparation le 22 septembre 2011 à New York.              
Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting
182. Has your country submitted the previous national reports (Interim and First National Reports)?
  • Yes, First report only
Other information
184. Please use this field to provide any other information on issues related to national implementation of the Protocol, including any obstacles or impediments encountered.
FR
Obstacle: attente de l'adoption du projet de loi nationale sur la biosécurité : mise à jour par rapport au protocole additionnel de Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur ( contexte national), capacités institutionnelle et technique insuffisantes.                                                                                     
Comments on reporting format
185. Please use this field to provide any other information on difficulties that you have encountered in filling in this report.
FR
Pas de difficulté à remplir de format de rapport. 
Survey on indicators of the Strategic Plan (2014)
In decision BS-VI/15, Parties requested the Executive Secretary to conduct a dedicated survey to gather information corresponding to indicators in the Strategic Plan that could not be obtained from the second national reports or through other existing mechanisms.

The answers to the survey are displayed below.
When did your national biosafety framework become operational?
indicator 1.1.1
  • 2004
Here you may provide further details
FR
FROM UNEP GEF
Survey 4. How many biosafety short-term training programmes and/or academic courses are offered annually in your country?
indicator 1.2.3
  • None
Survey 5. Does your country have in place a functional national mechanism for coordinating biosafety capacity-building initiatives?
indicator 1.2.4
  • No
Survey 6. How much additional funding (in the equivalent of US dollars) has your country mobilized in the last four years to support implementation of the Biosafety Protocol, beyond the regular national budgetary allocation?
indicator 1.2.5
  • 500,000 USD or more
Survey 7. Does your country have predictable and reliable funding for building capacity for the effective implementation of the Protocol?
indicator 1.2.6
  • No
Survey 8. How many LMO-related collaborative bilateral/multilateral arrangements has your country established with other Parties/non-Parties?
indicator 1.2.8
  • None
Survey 9. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment and/or risk management?
indicator 1.3.1.1
Survey 9.a) Risk assessment
  • No
Survey 9.b) Risk management
  • No
Here you may provide further details
FR
we .are preparing the draft of guidance on risk assessment and risk management
Survey 10. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
indicator 1.3.1.2
  • No
Here you may provide further details
FR
we have not any notifiers until now
Survey 11. Has your country adopted any common approaches to risk assessment with other countries?
indicator 1.3.2
  • No
Survey 12. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO?
indicator 1.3.3
  • No
Survey 13. Does your country have the capacity to identify, assess and/or monitor living modified organisms or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health?
indicator 1.4.2
Survey 13.a) Identify
  • Yes
Survey 13.b) Assess
  • Yes
Survey 13.c) Monitor
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
FR
we have three persons who had capacity to this
Survey 14. Does your country have available any guidance for the purpose of ensuring the safe handling, transport, and packaging of living modified organisms?
indicator 1.6.4
  • No
Survey 15. Does your country have any specific approaches or requirements that facilitate how socio-economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making?
indicator 1.7.2
  • No
Here you may provide further details
FR
we are preparing a draft of guidance to facilite how socio economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making
Survey 16. How many peer-reviewed published materials has your country used for the purpose of elaborating or determining national actions with regard to socio-economic considerations?
indicator 1.7.1
  • One or more
Survey 17. What is your country's experience, if any, in taking socio-economic considerations into account in LMO decision making?
indicator 1.7.3
FR
we include socioeconomic considerations into account in LMO decision making in the draft of law and in the guidance
Survey 18. Does your country have the capacity to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released?
indicator 1.8.3
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
FR
we have an institution laboratory 'institut Pasteur'a private sector to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released
Survey 19. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs?
indicator 2.2.3
Survey 19.a) Risk assessment
  • One or more
Survey 19.b) Monitoring
  • One or more
Survey 19.c) Management / Control
  • One or more
Survey 20. Does your country have the infrastructure (e.g. laboratory facilities) for monitoring or managing LMOs?
indicator 2.2.4
  • No
Here you may provide further details
FR
we have only a private laboratory
Survey 21. Is your country using training material and/or technical guidance for training in risk assessment and risk management of LMOs?
indicator 2.2.5
  • No
Survey 22. Are the available training materials and technical guidance on risk assessment and risk management of LMOs sufficient and effective?
indicator 2.2.6
Survey 22.a) Sufficient
  • No
Survey 22.b) Effective
  • No
Survey 23. How many customs officers in your country have received training in the identification of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
one customer officer has received training in identification of LMO
Survey 24. How many laboratory personnel in your country have received training in detection of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
two laboratory personnel have received training in detection of LMO
Survey 25. Does your country have reliable access to laboratory facilities for the detection of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.2
  • No
Survey 26. How many laboratories in your country are certified for LMO detection?
indicator 2.3.3
  • None
Survey 27. How many of the certified laboratories in the previous question are operational?
indicator 2.3.4
  • None
Survey 28. Has your country received any financial and/or technical assistance for capacity-building in the area of liability and redress relating to living modified organisms?
indicator 2.4.1
  • No
Survey 29. Does your country have administrative or legal instrument that provide for response measures for damage to biodiversity resulting from living modified organisms?
indicator 2.4.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
FR
we have a decree and a law for pollution
Survey 30. Has your country informed the public about existing modalities for public participation in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms?
indicator 2.5.2
  • Yes
Survey 31. If you answered yes to the previous question, please indicate the modalities used to inform the public?
indicator 2.5.2
  • National website
  • workshop on biosafety in region
Survey 32. If you indicated multiple modalities for public participation in the question above, which one was most used?
indicator 2.5.2
  • National website
Here you may provide further details
FR
workshop is most used
Survey 33. How many academic institutions in your country are offering biosafety education and training courses and programmes?
indicator 2.7.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
university
Survey 34. How many biosafety training materials and/or online modules are available in your country?
indicator 2.7.2
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
brochure
Survey 35. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system?
indicator 3.1.6
Survey 35.a) Monitoring system
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
FR
we have a committee of control in ministry of agriculture
Survey 36. Please indicate the number of regional, national and international events organized in relation to biosafety (e.g. seminars, workshops, press conferences, educational events, etc.,) in the last 2 years.
indicator 4.3.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
one african regional workshop on biosafety on march 2013
Survey 37. Please indicate the number of biosafety related publications that has been made available in your country in the last year.
indicator 4.3.2
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
national policy on biosafety, brochure on national biosafety, a decree for institution of committee
Survey 38. If biosafety related publications were made available (see question above), please indicate which modalities were preferred.
indicator 4.3.2
  • BCH Central Portal
Survey 39. How many collaborative initiatives (including joint activities) on the Cartagena Protocol and other Conventions and processes has your government established in the last 4 years?
indicator 5.2.1
  • One or more
Survey 40. Does your country have any awareness and outreach programmes on biosafety?
indicator 5.3.1
  • Yes
Survey 41. If you answered yes to the question above, please indicate what entity is responsible for carrying out the programmes and/or services and at which level the programmes take place.
indicator 5.3.1
E.g. local, national, etc.,
FR
interministerial committee
Survey 42. Has your country designed and/or implemented an outreach/communication strategy on biosafety?
indicator 5.3.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
FR
in national policy on biosafety there is some strategic axes for biosafety
Survey 43. Please indicate the number of educational materials on biosafety that are available and accessible to the public.
indicator 5.3.4
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
FR
brochure, national policy on biosafety,decree for national committee