| | 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
102505
Status
Published
Date of creation
2011-10-12 18:19 UTC (andrew.bowers@cbd.int)
Date of last update
2011-11-11 21:19 UTC (andrew.bowers@cbd.int)
Date of publication
2011-11-11 21:19 UTC (andrew.bowers@cbd.int)

Origin of report
Country
  • Lao People's Democratic Republic
Contact officer for report
Coordinates
Dr. Sourioudong SUNDARA
Director General of Science and Technology Research Institute, National Contact Point to Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Science and Technology Research Institute, Ministry of Science and Technology
Nahaidiao Road, P.O Box 2279
Vientiane
Lao People's Democratic Republic
Phone:+856 21 261 799
Fax:+856 21 262 002
Email:sourioudong@yahoo.co.uk
Consulted stakeholders
9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report
Mr. Khamphan THAMPHITAK, Local Expert on Biotechnology and Biosafety
Submission
10. Date of submission
2011-09-30
11. Time period covered by this report
Start date
2001
Time period covered by this report
End date
2011
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 sets of biosafety guidelines
17. Has your country established a mechanism for the budgetary allocations of funds for the operation of its national biosafety framework?
  • Yes
18. Does your country have permanent staff to administer functions directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • Yes
19. If you answered Yes to question 18, how many permanent staff members are in place whose functions are directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • Less than 10
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:
Since Lao PDR has become a party of the Convention on Biological Diversity on Setember 20, 1996 and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety on November 1, 2004. The Lao government is obliged to develop its national regulartory framwork in the field of the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology for reducing potential consequences that may have an adverse effect biological diversity and human health. Laos has participated in a UNEF/GEF funded project to develop National Biosafety Framwork (NBF). The NBF has been developed since 2002 and was adopted by the government on December 25, 2004. It consists of a combination of policy, legal, administrative and technical instruments that are set in place to address safety contains of six components including the government policy on Biosafety, the regulatory regime for Biosafety, administrative systems for Biosafety, meganism for public education awareness and participation, capacity building programs to implement CPB and project priorities to implement the NBF.

This NBF was also used to prepare a Biosafety Law Draft which was considered initially at the Lao Government Meeting on August 30, 2005. However, the draft is yet to be approved. Since new decisions have been agreed by Parties at the COP/MOP meetings of 2006 and 2008, the Draft Law needs to revise to be in-line with these COP/MOP decisions and also to be supported by drafting appropriate secondary and tertiary instruments viz. During the reporting period, Laos is carrying out the project that is to support the implementation of NBF funded by UNEF/GEF between September, 2009 and November, 2013. The aim of this project is to assist Laos to have a workable and transparent regulatory regime for Biosafety by 2015 and to fulfill its National Socio-economic Development Plan to 2020 and obligations as a party to the CPB.

However, there is a challenge for the Lao government or National Competent Authorities that Biosafety being new to the country, awareness among policy makers and public are low. In addition, the public still has not sufficient information and understanding for active involvement to the Protocol implementation.
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:
Laos does not have a single regulation of transboundary movements, handling and use of living modified pharmaceuticals. As the country is a member of Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN). It follows an ASEAN phamaceutical agreement which is called ACCSQ Pharmaceutical Product Working Group. Under the agreement ASEAN Common Technical Requirements (ACTR) and Common Technical Dossier (ACTD) are applied to risk assessment prior to making of decisions on import genetic modified medicines such as
human insulin and hepatitis vaccine B.
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:
So far, Biosafety Law is under developed by Science and Technology Research Institute (STRI), Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST). MOST plays an important role as a principal organisation in undertaking the activities for development of National Biotechnology Strategy and Action Plan, Biosafety Law and Biosafety guidelines. MOST works closely with National Coordinating Committee (NCC) consisting of all representatives from Competent Authorities of different ministries, government agencies and non-government agencies. NCC is coordinated by Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Industry and Commerce, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Communication Post Transport and Construction, and State Planning Committee. However, this is flexible to involve other institutes who are related to the work in future.

No such decisions have been taken during the report period regarding to transit and contained use of LMOs.
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?
  • No
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?
  • Yes, to some extent
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?
  • No
38. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Not applicable
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?
  • None
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?
  • None
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:
No such decisions have been taken on applications/notifications regarding international transboundary movements of LMOs for international introduction into the environment. This is because of Laos has not been a country of import and export of LMOs for the purpose of international release into the environment during the reporting period.

So far, an updated capacity of laboratory to detect LMOs is conducted by STRI, MOST. Ordering equipments and strengthening technical staffs are doing activities in the institute to ensure the capacity to detect and identify genetically modified organisms by 2013. STRI has bilateral agreements with serveral international organisations such as ASEAN, EU,
UNEP/GEF, as well as some Asian countries, Japan, Vietnam and Thailand to strengthen capacity on GMO detection and monitoring by human resource development and some equipment supports.

As Biosafety Law is under developing in Laos. If Laos wants to import LMOs we will proceed based on the Protocol on Biosafety since it has been ratified by the government. While waiting for the Biosafety Law is passed by the National Assambly in 2013 or 2015, we will apply the regulation for detailed procedure on risk assessment and administrative for release of LMOs into the environment.
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?
  • No
52. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?
  • No
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?
  • No
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:
Laos has not been gone through applications for the purpose of food, feed and processing in both import and export into the country, so we have no experiences in the implementation of the Article 11.

In Laos, the National Consumer Protection Law has been implemented in 2010 by the
Ministry of Industry and Commerce that food importors must be gone through all processes requested by the concerned stakeholders to ensure comsumer and environmental safety. Moreover, it requires also lebelling of commodities which will be placed into markets nationwide. This clearly appear in part II, Article 13-20. However, the law does not specifically cover genetically modified commodities.
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:
Laos has not been gone through review of decisions any international transboundary
movements of LMOs, so we have no experiences in the implementation of Article 12.
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:
No simplified procedure has been adopted by Laos for implementing Article 13 during
reporting period. Although there is no implementing regulation exist, Laos is drafting a law on Biosafety that one chapter will contain provisions simplified procedure.
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:
Lao PDR has not joined biolateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements concerning the implementation of Article 14.
Article 15 – Risk assessment
81. Has your country established a mechanism for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • No
83. Has your country established guidelines for how to conduct risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
84. Has your country acquired the necessary domestic capacity to conduct risk assessment?
  • Yes
85. Has your country established a mechanism for training national experts to conduct risk assessments?
  • Yes
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?
  • Less than 10
91. Has your country ever required the exporter to conduct the risk assessment(s)?
  • Not applicable
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:
Since Lao National Biosafety Framwork had been published in 2004, its was also used to prepare and develop Biosafety regulation and guidelines. Those guidelines are Biosafety Guidelines in Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering for Field Work and Planned Release, Biosafety Guideline in Biotechnoly and Genetic Engineering for Laboratory Works, and Biosafety Guideline on Risk Assessment and Management to LMOs, and Handling Application Procedures for LMOs.

Laos is conducting the implementation of NBF project which is funded by UNEP/GEP
during reporting period. Enhancing facilities and human resources are two main activities that will be done for ensuring experts from National Competent Authorities to be able to conduct risk assessments. Additionally, Science and Technology Research Institute, MOST is drafting a regulation on Biosafety which will include the mechanism in an article of risk assessment of LMOs. It is expected to come into force by 2015.

90. If Laos has taken decisions regarding to LMOs in the current reporting period, multiple risk assessments will be conducted before making decisions. Ideally, the risk assessments undertaken must be carried out in a scientifically sound manner to provide a sufficient information of LMOs on the biological diversity, human health, socio-economic and political impacts. The detail of risk assessment steps can be refered to Annex III of the Protocol.
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?
  • Yes, to some extent
94.2) LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • Yes, to some extent
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:
Up to now, we are developing and upgrading the existing guidelines on risk managements and risk assessments to produce new guidelines with the requirements of the Protocol.

98. Laos has cooperated with neighboring countries to control the transboundary movements of infectious disease such as bird flu and SAR. However, there is none cooperation with other parties with a view for identifying and taking measures relation to LMOs in both conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

In general, the development risk management is necessary for National Competent
Authorities in Laos. This is because of RM procedure plays important role to obtain a sufficient information for both environmental and food safety before releasing to the
environment and consumers. Moreover, the management with regard to monitoring after
release will still need in order to follow up in place for an effective implementation of
Article 16.
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?
  • No
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:
There is no occurrence under Lao jurisdiction that led, or may have led, to unintentional
transboundary movements of one or more LMOs to, or from territories.

During reporting period, Laos is drafting and developing Biosafety Law which will include
a chapter of unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures.

Lao government has concerned about LMOs transboundary movements that could have adverse effect on biological diversity and people health. Therefore, Competent National Authorities are required to complete the Biosafety regulation as soon as posible and to build capacity on genetically modified organism detections and their emergency measures for identifying the unintentional transboundary movements.
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:
At the end in 1995, Lao PDR became a member of Codex Alimentarius Commission and
established the National Codex Committee in 1998. Concurrently, the Food Law and other
Laws related to Food Safety were adopted by the National Assembly and enacted by the
President, Lao PDR. Regulations, rules and codes of practice related to food that were
previously issued are being revised, and some necessary regulations and standards of the
Codex Alimentaris Commission. To protect the health of consumers in Laos and to promote
fair trade related to food safety, the Ministry of Health takes a lead in developing a national policy, regulations and plan of action for food safety, which requires the participation of all relevant stakeholders and people involved in the food chain, from farm to table, in order to ensure food safety control. The Ministry of Health has been issued serveral regulations concerning with food safety such as (1) Food Law, No. 04/NA, dated May 15, 2004; (2) Regulation on Bottled Drinking Water, No. 585/MOH, dated May 12, 2006; (3) Regulation on the Control on Production, Exported-Imported Safe Food, No. 586/MOH, dated May 12, 2006; (4) Ministerial Regulation on the Basic Principels in the Application Sanitary and
Technical Measures for the Food Safety Management, No. 518/MOH, dated March 18, 2009; (5) Regulation on Lebeling of Prepackaged Food, No. 519/MOH, dated March 18, 2009. None of these Food Safety regulations not yet directly address the measures to require that documentation accompanying living modified organisms that are intended for direct use as food and feed, or processing. There are none also identified that food may contain LMOs and are not intended for national introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information.

Additionally, Laos is neither be an importer nor exporter of LMOs. The country has been
issued a Decree on Import and Export of Goods on April 6, 2011 during the reporting
period. According to this Decree, serveral authorities are included in decision making for
import and export administration such as Ministry of Public Health, Ministry of Agriculture
and Forestry, Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Information and Culture,
National Defense, Ministry of Public Works and Transportation and others. Here, Ministry
of Industry and Commerce is the focal point to coordinate with line ministries to determine
and to issue the following: (1) List of prohibited import; (2) List of prohibited export; (3)
List of good subjected to import licensing; (4) List of goods subjected to export licensing;
(5) List of goods subjected to requirements on sanitary and phytosanitary measures and
technical regulations; (6) List of the import and export administration authorities for each
type of goods included in the above lists. There is no cases of genetically modified
organisms in the regulation based on handed, packaged, and transport under conditions of
safety in the context of transboundary movements. Thus the completed Biosafety Law will
fulfill its gaps regarding to LMOs management in Lao PDR. Under this Law Draft, Laos has
been outlined and decided to implement Article 18 in order to mitigate potential negative
impacts on both international and domestic trades of genetically modified comodities.
However, the documentation requirements regarding to contained use, LMO-FFP and direct
introduction into the environment are stll under consideration and adoptation.
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, some information
123. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 19 in your country:
STRI has been nominated to be national focal point as a Competent Authority to perform funtions required by CPB and BCH in Lao PDR.

This information has already posted into BCH. Laos is currently in the process of implementing UNEP/GEF BCH project, so it is expected that new and updated information will be sent out to the website.
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 available but only partially available in the BCH
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 but only partially available in the BCH
124.e) Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information not available
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?
  • Yes, in some cases
128. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?
  • No
129. If you answered Yes to question 128, has your country reported these problems to the BCH or the Secretariat?
  • Not applicable
131. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country:
The establishment of Lao National BCH has been initiated by GEF-BCH funded project in 2003 that included training and equipment supports for international border checking points and related ministries. However, technical staffs that were trained from previous project activities have been moved to other responsibilities and positions, and an access facility to internet of some ministries and provinces were not available.

During this reporting period, Laso has granted BCH-II building capacity for effective participation in the Biosafety Clearing House. The purpose of the project is to provide training information and network, and promoting regional exchange as well as to extend BCH knowledge across a wider range of stakeholders. So far, we are in the process of reforming from National Authority of Science and Technology (NAST) to Ministry of Science and technology (MOST). Therefore, it is necessary to reform and improve National BCH teams and mechanisms as soon as possible and will inform to the CBD secretariat on this matter.
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:
Laos is concernec about confidential information to ensure that it has procedures to protect such information based on living modified organisms. This provision will be also defined as a chapter in Biosafety regulation.
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?
  • Bilateral 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
  • 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
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
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?
  • Yes
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:
Laos is conducting INBF which is supported by UNEP/GEF fund. The project aims to enhance country administrative, legistrative, policy, risk assessment and public awareness on LMOs. Under the project activities, a number of training courses are offered to relating Competent Authority's technical staffs such as Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Industry and Commerce, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Ministry of Education, Women's Union, Ministry of Civil Works and Transportation, Provincial Science and Technology Offices.

Under the INBF activities, the National Biostechnology Stratergy and Action Plan are developed which includes human resource development and infrastucture improvment.
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?
  • Yes, to some extent
152. Has your country established a biosafety website?
  • 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?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
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?
  • Yes
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:
Mechanism for public education, awareness and participation (PEAP) is one of priority tasks for Laos to increase the understanding of LMOs and Biosafety based on safe transfer, handling, and use in the country. Under the INBF project, Laos has conducted serveral training workshops and siminar meetings to deliver awareness documents on Biosafety to policy makers, technical staffs in both central and provincial governments within several stakeholders.

Continious siminar and workshops on the importance of Biosafety will be carried on within project period. The project implementor is preparing and developing a university curriculum that contains the knowledge of LMOs and Biosafety knowledge. Furthermore, serveral types of media will be used to promote public awareness and participation.
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:
Laos had an opportunity to arrange awareness workshops with scientist from non-parties such as USA on benefits, risk assessments, and risk managements as well as socio-economic impacts of LMOs.
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?
  • Never
175. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country:
Laos has no experience regarding to illegal transboundary movements of LMOs, so there is not avaiable data in the country. This issue will be included in Biosafety regulations and measures of enforcement.
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?
  • Yes
177. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
178. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 26 in your country:
Socio-economic consideration is necessary to take into account for making decisions regarding to genetically modified organism and its products. This means that the requirement of socio-economic assessment of LMOs before releasing into the environment.
Article 27 – Liability and Redress
179. Has your country signed the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?
  • No
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:
Recently, the Nagoya-Kuula Lumpur Supplementary Protocol is translated to Lao language. It will be consulted by national stakholder meetings and propose to the government meeting for considering to sign and ratify by the end of the year 2012.
Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting
182. Has your country submitted the previous national reports (Interim and First National Reports)?
  • No
183. If your country did not submit previous reports, indicate the main challenges that hindered the submission
  • Lack of financial resources to gather the necessary information
  • Lack of relevant information at the national level
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.
During the reporting period, the regulation on Biosafety is not yet completed, so there is a limited information to answer the report questions.

Lao PDR has started implementing NBF project in September, 2009 which will be
completed in November 2013. This five years project recieves a funding support from UNEP/GEF. Science and Technology Research Institute is the national focal point and the implementing agency for this project.

Re: Q. 14 - The government of Lao PDR has acceded to the Conventional on Biological Diversity on September 20, 1996.

On January 28, 2000 the conference of parties CBD adopted the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB) in accordance with article 28 of the CBD. It was opened for signature in Nairobi on May 15, 2000. The CPB entered in force on September 11, 2003. the Lao government has acceded to the CPB on November 1, 2004.

Re: Q. 136 - Regional channels as well
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.
Overall, no difficulties have been encountered in answering this report questions because they are based on the articles of Cartagena Protocol. However, there is alimitation of information technology (IT) in filling the report due to a fixed format. For example, font colour is often change when using different computers and some unwanted typing can not be detected.