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

  Home|Finding Information|Record details   Printer-friendly version

Third National Report on the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Record information and status
Record ID
109104
Status
Published
Date of creation
2015-10-29 16:26 UTC (andrew.bowers@cbd.int)
Date of publication
2015-10-29 16:26 UTC (andrew.bowers@cbd.int)

Origin of report
1. Country
  • Cameroon
Contact officer for report
Coordinates
WOUAMANE MBELE
National Focal Point for the application of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety / Director of the Department for the Development of Environmental Policy.
Ministry of Environment, Protection of Nature and Sustainable Development.
P.O Box 320
Yaoundé
Cameroon
Phone:(+237) 699 51 31 17
Email:wouamane@yahoo.fr
Consulted stakeholders
9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report
Ministry of Environment, Protection of Nature and Sustainable Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife, Ministry of Public Health, Ministry of Higher Education, Ministry of Commerce, Agency for Standards and Quality, Ministry of Mines, Industries and Technological Development, Biotechnology Unit - University of Yaoundé I, Institute of Agricultural Research for Development, National Biosafety Committee, Biotechnology Unit-University of Buea, Ministry of Livestock, Fisheries and Animal Industries, The Cameroon Biosecurity Project, Institute of Medical Research and Medicinal Plants studies.
Submission
10. Date of submission
2015-10-29
11. Time period covered by this report
Start date
2011
11. Time period covered by this report
End date
2015
Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Is your country a Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB)?
  • Yes
Article 2 – General provisions
14. Has your country introduced the necessary legal, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the Protocol?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 3.1.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • A domestic regulatory framework is partially in place
15. If you indicated that a national biosafety framework exists in the above question, when did it become operational?
This question is relevant to the indicator 1.1.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • 2003
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?
  • 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 5
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
Within the reporting period, the following regulatory framework have been put in place:
- Decree N°2012/431 of 1st of October 2012 organising the Ministry of Environment, Protection of Nature and Sustainable Development,
- Order N° 039/CAB/PM of 30th of January 2012 carrying the creation, organisaiton and functioning of the National Biosafety Committee,
- Decision N° 00334/D/MINEPDED/CAB of 9th of September 2014 constituting the National Biosafety Committee.
- An interinstitutional and trans-sectoral coordination mechanism is under piloting within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project especially with respect to the functioning of its Project Advisory Committee.
- Setting up of mixed control posts in charge of surveillance at entry points.
Article 5 - Pharmaceuticals
22. Does your country regulate the transboundary movement, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) which are pharmaceuticals?
  • Yes
23. If you answered Yes to question 22, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
  • Partially
24. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 5 in your country:
LMOs which are pharmaceuticals are regulated within articles 2(3) and 49 to 53 of the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and also within articles 26 - 35 of the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st of May 2007 on the application of the Law.                                                                                                           
The Law of 2003 as well as the Decree of 2007 are available on the BCH.
However, the Order N° 039/CAB/PM of 30th of January 2012 carrying the creation, organisaiton and functioning of the National Biosafety Committee and the Decision N° 00334/D/MINEPDED/CAB of 9th of September 2014 constituting the National Biosafety Committee are not yet available on the BCH
Article 6 – Transit and Contained use
25. Does your country regulate the transit of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.8.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
26. Does your country regulate the contained use of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.1.2 and 1.8.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
27. If you answered Yes to questions 25 or 26, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
  • Partially
28. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 6 in your country:
The Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st of May 2007 on the application of the Law are available on the BCH.                                                                                          
However, the Order N° 039/CAB/PM of 30th of January 2012 carrying the creation, organisaiton and functioning of the National Biosafety Committee and the Decision N° 00334/D/MINEPDED/CAB of 9th of September 2014 constituting the National Biosafety Committee are not yet available on the BCH
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 OR a domestic regulatory framework consistent with the Protocol regarding the transboundary movement of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.1.2 and 3.1.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
30. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions regarding first intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
- An Advanced Informed Agreement No. 00794/AP/MINEPDED/SG/DSCPR/SDCPB of 31st of May 2012 was delivered by the Competent National Authority for the importation of 10kg Genetically Modified Cotton seeds (FM989-GLT) and 10kgs of non GM cotton (FM989) for confined field trials.
- In 2012, a first authorization for the importation was delivered by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MINADER) of GM cotton for confined field trials.
- In 2013, a second authorization for import by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MINADER) of GM cotton for cofined field trials;
- In 2014, a third authorization was issued by MINADER for import of GM cotton for confined field trials;
- On the 6th of July 2015, an AIA No. 00988/L/MINEPDED/SG/DAG was delivered by the Competent National Authority for open field trials for a period of 3 years.
- In 2015, a fourth authorization was issued by MINADER for the importation of GM cotton seeds for open field trials.
31. If you answered Yes to question 30, does the mechanism also apply to cases of intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment that were not subject to transboundary movement?
  • No
32. 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?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The legal requirements are regulated within article 27(1) of the  Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and article 45 of the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law.
33. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information contained in the notification?
  • Yes
34. Has your country ever received an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
35. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
36. If you answered Yes to question 35, how many LMOs has your country approved to date for import for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
37. If you answered Yes to question 35, how many LMOs, not imported, has your country approved to date for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • None
38. 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
39. 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
40. 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?
  • In some cases only
41. Did the notifications contain complete information (at a minimum the information specified in Annex I of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety)?
  • In some cases only
42. Has your country acknowledged receipt of the notifications to the notifier within ninety days of receipt?
  • In some cases only
43. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s)?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • In some cases only the notifier
44. What percentage of your country’s decisions fall into the following categories?
  • Approval of the import/use of the LMO(s) with conditions
100%
45. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • In some cases only the notifier
46. 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
Decisions for the delivery of an AIA are taken by the National Competent Authority upon consultation with the National Biosafety Committee.
Within the reporting period, a total of six decisions for experimentation have been taken  comprised of two (02) AIA authorizations and four (04) import authorizations. The two AIA decisions taken include:
-  AIA No. 00794/AP/MINEPDED/SG/DSCPR/SDCPB of 31st of May 2012 delivered by the Competent National Authority for the importation of Genetically Modified Cotton for confined field trials.
- AIA No. 00988/L/MINEPDED/SG/DAG of 6th of July 2015 was delivered by the Competent National Authority for the importation of GM cotton for open field trials.
So far, all AIA decisions taken have been forwarded to the notifier but not to the BCH.
The first AIA decision for the importation of GM cotton for confined field trials went beyond the ninety days timeline due to reasons beyond the control the Competent National Authority. However, with the creation of the National Biosafety Committee, the second AIA decision for the importation of GM cotton for open field trials respected the ninety days timeline.
Article 11 – Procedure for living modified organisms intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (LMOs-FFP)
47. Has your country adopted specific law(s) or regulation(s) for decision-making regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
48. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The accuracy of information is addressed within the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law.
However, the proportion of LMOs within a package is not specified in the above regulatory instruments.
49. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
50. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions on the import of LMOs-FFP?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
51. Has your country indicated its needs for financial and technical assistance and capacity-building in respect of LMOs-FFP?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
52. Has your country ever taken a decision on LMOs-FFP (either on import or domestic use)?
  • No
58. 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
Capacity building activities have been envisaged within the training and capacity building component of the Cameroon Biosecurity Project.
A training of trainers in biological invasions was carried out in May 2012 followed by a national training in November 2014. Several other trainings including trainings on detection, diagnosis, monitoring and quantification of biological invaders are envisaged within the Project.
Article 12 – Review of decision
59. Has your country established a mechanism for the review and change of a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes
60. Has your country ever received a request for a review of a decision?
  • Yes
61. Has your country ever reviewed / changed a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes, decision reviewed and changed
62. In the current reporting period, how many decisions were reviewed and/or changed regarding an intentional transboundary movement of an LMO?
  • Less than 5
63. Has your country informed both the notifier and the BCH of the review and/or changes in the decision?
This question is relevant to indicators 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • In some cases only the notifier
64. Has your country informed both the notifier and the BCH of the review and changes in the decision within thirty days?
  • Yes, to some extent
65. Has your country provided reasons to both the notifier and the BCH for the review and/or changes in the decision?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • In some cases only the notifier
66. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 12 in your country
With respect to the GM cotton trials, a total of two reviews of request for reconsideration of the decisions taken have been made and changed.
The first review and change of decision was done during concertations for the delivery of the AIA for confined field trials.
The second review and change of decision was made during the concertations for the delivery of an AIA for open field trials.
Article 13 – Simplified procedure
67. Has your country established a system for the application of the simplified procedure regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes
68. Has your country ever applied the simplified procedure?
  • No
70. In the current reporting period, how many LMOs has your country applied the simplified procedure to?
  • None
71. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 13 in your country
So far, Cameroon has not received any request requiring the application of the simplified procedures.
Article 14 – Bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements
72. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements?
  • No
Articles 15 & 16 – Risk Assessment and Risk Management
77. Has your country established a national framework for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
78. If you answered Yes to question 77, does this framework include procedures for identifying and/or training national experts to conduct risk assessments?
  • Yes
79. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.3 of the Strategic Plan
a) Risk assessment:
  • 10 or more
b) Management / Control:
  • 10 or more
c) Monitoring:
  • 10 or more
80. Is your country using training material and/or technical guidance for training in risk assessment and risk management of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
81. Is your country using the "Manual on Risk Assessment of LMOs" (developed by CBD Secretariat) for training in risk assessment?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
82. Is your country using the "Guidance on Risk Assessment of LMOs" (developed by the Online Forum and the AHTEG on Risk Assessment and Risk Management) for training in risk assessment?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
83. Are the currently available training materials or technical guidance on risk assessment and/or risk management of LMOs sufficient?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.6 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
84. Does your country have the capacity to detect, 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?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.4.2 and 1.6.3 of the Strategic Plan
a) Detect:
  • Yes
b) Identify:
  • Yes
c) Assess:
  • Yes
d) Monitor:
  • Yes
85. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment or risk management, or for evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
a) Risk assessment:
  • Yes
b) Risk management:
  • Yes
86. Is your country using the "Guidance on Risk Assessment of LMOs" (developed by the Online Forum and the AHTEG on Risk Assessment and Risk Management) for conducting risk assessment or risk management, or for evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
87. Has your country adopted any common approaches to risk assessment with other countries?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
88. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.4.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
89. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO including any type of risk assessment of LMOs, e.g. for contained use, field trials, commercial purposes, direct use as food, feed, or for processing?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.3.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
90. If you answered Yes to question 89, please indicate the scope of the risk assessments (select all that apply):
  • Field trial
  • LMOs for Contained use
91. If you answered Yes to question 89, were the summary reports of the risk assessments submitted to the BCH?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
92. If you answered Yes to question 89, were risk assessments conducted for all decisions taken on LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment or on domestic use of LMOs for direct use as food, feed, or for processing?
  • Yes, always
93. If you answered Yes to question 89, how many risk assessments were conducted in the current reporting period?
  • 5 or less
94. 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?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
A period of observation of LMO is prescribed in articles 41 of the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and article 48(3) of the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law.
           There is a quarantine facility for the conservation of the GM cotton imported for field trials. Also, only one person is authorized to access the quarantine facility or handle the imported GM cotton seeds.
            There have been regular inspections of the experimental sites for the GM cotton field trials by the National Biosafety Committee. Regular reporting to the National Biosafety Committee of all activities carried out on the different experimental sites relating to the GM cotton field trials. There is a 24 hour security measures put in place at the experimental sites. Special protection outfits are obligatory for all visitors to the experimental sites.
95. Has your country established a mechanism for monitoring potential effects of LMOs that are released into the environment?
  • Yes
96. Does your country have the infrastructure (e.g. laboratory facilities) for monitoring or managing LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
97. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Articles 15 and 16 in your country
There is a legal framework for evaluation of risks within the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon, the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law and the activities of the National Biosafety Committee and the ongoing Cameroon Biosecurity Project.
There is a training on risk analysis envisaged within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project. The training of trainers manuals within the project  produced will be further used for national trainings.
So far the manual on RA from the SCBD has not been used for national trainings. This manual was developed after the 2004 RA & RM manual for Cameroon which is up for review during the Cameroon Biosecurity Project. The review will definitely be derived from the manual on RA developed by the SCBD.
With respect to the country's capacity to detect, identify, monitor or assess LMOs, the following laboratories are currently recognised; the Biotechnology Centre of the University of Yaoundé I, the Biotechnology Unit of the University of Buea, the JB Johnson Biotechnology Lab IRAD-EKONA, the Biotechnology Laboratory of CARBAP in NJOMBE, the National Veterinary Laboratory (LANAVET), the laboratory of Centre Pasteur in Yaoundé and CREMER/IMPM. Eventhough these facilities exist, there is need for increased capacity building which will be undertaken under the Cameroon Biosecurity Project and beyond.
Trainings on risk assessment and risk management are carried out in the Biotechnology centre of the University of Yaoundé I and the Biotechnology Unit of the University of Buea. The trainings on risk assessment, risk management/ control and monitoring  carried out within the University have been limited to components within Degree and Master's programmes in Biotechnology and Biochemistry. Furthermore, training workshops on risk assessment and risk management are envisaged within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project.
The participation of experts from Burkina Faso in meetings related to the GM cotton trials by SODECOTON/ BAYER, the participation of NESTLE, BAYER, SODECOTON in the forum for GMOs that took place from the 8th to the 10th of September 2015 reflect Cooperation between Cameroon and other parties on LMO intellectual property issues. For the ongoing field trials on GM cotton, risk assessments have been carried out.
The framework for monitoring the effects of LMOs has been developed under the Cameroon Biosecurity Project with the production of a contingency plan and emergency response mechanism. However, this is yet to be applied.
Article 17 – Unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures
98. Has your country established and maintained appropriate measures to prevent unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
99. 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?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The contingency planning and emergency response manual has been developed under the Cameroon Biosecurity Project. However, these tools have not been tested.
100. Does your country have the capacity to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.8.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
101. 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?
  • Less than 5
102. If you answered Yes to question 101, has your country notified affected or potentially affected States, the BCH and, where appropriate, relevant international organizations, of the above release?
This question is relevant to indicators 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
104. If you answered Yes to question 101, has your country immediately consulted the affected or potentially affected States to enable them to determine appropriate responses and initiate necessary action, including emergency measures?
  • No, consultation was never made
105. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 17 in your country
During the reporting period, there is an article published online under the Food and Nutrition Sciences website (Vol.5 No.10(2014), Article ID:45604,7 pages DOI:10.4236/fns.2014.510102) by Djoulde D. R and Sobda Gone titled "Evidence of the Presence of Genetically Modified Foods in the Sudano-Sahelian Zones of Cameroon". This article claims that there is an illegal and perhaps an unintentional transboundary movement of five (05) GMOs in the Northern Regions of Cameroon.
A Masters' Degree Thesis in Biochemistry by Ghepdeu Gisele in 2009 titled "Detection of Foreign Genes in Food Products in Cameroon: Case of Cereals and Cereal-based Products" also indicates that GMOs can be found in the commercial sector in Cameroon.
Article 18 – Handling, transport, packaging and identification
106. 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?
  • Yes
107. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
108. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
109. If you answered Yes or Yes, to some extent to question(s) 107 and/or 108, what type of documentation does your country require for the identification of LMOs-FFP?
  • Existing types of documentation
110. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
111. If you answered Yes or Yes, to some extent to question 110, what type of documentation does your country require for the identification of LMOs that are destined for contained?
  • Existing types of documentation
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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
113. If you answered Yes or Yes, to some extent to question 112, what type of documentation does your country require for the identification of LMOs that are intended for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Existing types of documentation
114. Does your country have available any guidance for the purpose of ensuring the safe handling, transport, and packaging of living modified organisms?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
115. Does your country have the capacity to enforce the requirements of identification and documentation of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon, the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law and control posts at the level of entry points exist but reinforcement is however weak. Increased capacity building is required to ensure efficiency in the identification and documentation of LMOs. This is envisaged within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project
116. How many customs officers in your country have received training in the identification of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
117. Has your country established procedures for the sampling and detection of LMOs?
  • No
118. How many laboratory personnel in your country have received training in detection of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
119. Does your country have reliable access to laboratory facilities for the detection of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
120. How many laboratories in your country are certified for LMO detection?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • None
122. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 18 in your country:
The handling, transport, packaging and identification of LMOs are regulated by article 28 of the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and articles 36-40, 49 - 55 of the  Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st of May 2007 on the application of the Law.
So far within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project,  some customs officers and laboratory personnel have been trained on Biological invasion in 2012 and 2014. More of such trainings are envisaged within the project.
Presently in Cameroon, the Biotechnology Centre of the University of Yaoundé I and the Biotechnology Unit of the University of Buea have been accredited by the Competent National Authority but not certified by an International Body.
The capacities of the Biotechnology Centre of the University of Yaounde I and the Biotechnology Unit of the University of Buea had been reinforced within the National Biosafety Framework project and maybe further reinforced within the ongoing Cameroon Biosecurity Project.
Article 19 – Competent National Authorities and National Focal Points
123. In case your country has designated more than one competent national authority, has your country established a mechanism for the coordination of their actions prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Not applicable
124. 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?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
- Order N° 039/CAB/PM of 30th  of January 2012 carrying the creation, organisaiton and functioning of the National Biosafety Committee,
            - Decision N° 00334/D/MINEPDED/CAB of 9th  of September 2014 constituting the National Biosafety Committee.
            - Further capacities can be obtained from Universities, Research Institutes, Reference Laboratories already cited and human resources available.
125. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 19 in your country
The Competent National Authority takes decisions on Biosafety issues upon consultation with the National Biosafety Committee. The National Biosafety Committee is charged with the responsibility of examining requests involving LMOs. In Cameroon, there exist only one Competent National Authority.
Article 20 – Information Sharing and the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)
126. Please provide an overview of the status of the mandatory 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.
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
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
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 available but only partially available in the BCH
c) Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements (Articles 14, paragraph 2 and 20, paragraph 3 (b))
  • Information not available
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
e) Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available and in the BCH
f) Decisions by a Party on regulating the transit of specific living modified organisms (LMOs) (Article 6, paragraph 1)
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
g) Occurrence of unintentional transboundary movements that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity (Article 17, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
h) Illegal transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 25, paragraph 3)
  • Information not available
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 available but not in the BCH
j) Information on the application of domestic regulations to specific imports of LMOs (Article 14, paragraph 4)
  • Information not available
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
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
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
n) Review and change of decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 12, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
o) LMOs granted exemption status by each Party (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
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
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 available but not in the BCH
127. Has your country established a mechanism for strengthening the capacity of the BCH National Focal Point to perform its administrative functions?
  • No
128. 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
129. Does your country use the information available in the BCH in its decision making processes on LMOs?
  • No
130. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?
This question is relevant to indicator 4.1.8 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The national BCH is not fully functional and the information found on it requires updating. It is a lot easier to download information via the central portal of the BCH.
131. Is the information submitted by your country to the BCH complete and up-to date?
  • No
132. 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:
This question is relevant to indicator 4.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
133. Please indicate the number of biosafety related publications that has been made available in your country in the last year:
This question is relevant to indicator 4.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
134. If biosafety related publications were made available (see question above), please indicate which modalities were preferred:
This question is relevant to indicator 4.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • The Biotechnology Policy Framework is published on the website of the Cameroon Academy of Sciences. Presentations made during the national Forum on GMOs that took place from the 8th - 10th of September 2015 are available on the website of the Ministry of Mines, Industry and Technological Development.
135. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country
The Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law make provisions for the exchange of information via the BCH. The national portal of the BCH exist and is hosted within the Competent National Authority. However, the National BCH is not fully functional and information available requires updating. So far, the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law can be accessed from the national BCH as well as the central portal of the BCH.
A major issue is the unavailability of information on the ongoing GM cotton trials as well as the activities of the Cameroon Biosecurity Project on the national BCH.
Within the reporting period, a great number of national, regional and international events on Biosafety issues have been organised such as, workshops and trainings within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project, the National Biosafety Project Coordinators Regional Meetings, the National Forum on the utilisation of GMOs, the Biotechnology Policy Framework Forum, etc. 
However, the information generated from the above events is not widely available and can not be accessed via the national BCH portal. The reports from these events have been published under various national websites.
Article 21 – Confidential information
136. Has your country established procedures to protect confidential information received under the Protocol?
  • Yes
137. Does your country allow the notifier to identify information that is to be treated as confidential?
  • Yes, always
Article 22 – Capacity-building
139. Does your country have predictable and reliable funding for building capacity for the effective implementation of the Protocol?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.6 and 3.1.8 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
140. 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, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The Cameroon Biosecurity Project is benefitting from external support from UNEP/ GEF and has a capacity building and training component.
            The 2014 Forum on the Biotechnology Policy Framework benefitted from external support form US National Academy of Sciences.
            The 2015 National Forum on the utilisation of GMOs benefitted from the external support of NESTLE S.A.
            Several capacity building and communication activities on the GM cotton involving farmers organisations, extension agents of SODECOTON, members of the Biosafety Committee, administrative officers, parliamentarians, municipal authorities as well as the civil society, have been carried out with the support of BAYER CropSciences.
141. If you answered Yes to question 140, how were these resources made available?
  • Multilateral channels
142. Has your country provided support to other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • No
144. Has your country ever initiated a process to access GEF funds for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Yes
145. If you answered Yes to question 144, how would you characterize the process?
Please add further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds under question 157.
  • Average
146. 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)
147. 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, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
A lot of activities have been carried out within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project such as consultancies where national and international consultants are coupled, trainings of trainers' workshops as well as national trainings.
148. If you answered Yes to question 147, 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
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Socio-economic considerations
  • Implementation of the documentation requirements under Article 18.2 of the Protocol
  • Measures to address unintentional and/or illegal transboundary movements of LMOs
  • Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
  • Taking into account risks to human health
149. During the current reporting period, has your country carried out a capacity-building needs assessment?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
150. If you answered Yes to question 149, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
151. Does your country still have capacity-building needs?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.7 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
152. If you answered Yes to question 151, 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
153. Has your country developed a capacity-building strategy or action plan?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
154. Does your country have in place a functional national mechanism for coordinating biosafety capacity-building initiatives?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
155. How many biosafety short-term training programmes and/or academic courses are offered annually in your country?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • 1 per year or more
156. Has your country submitted the details of national biosafety experts to the Roster of Experts in the BCH?
  • Yes
157. 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
Within the reporting period, some capacity building activities have been carried out with respect to the Cameroon Biosecurity Project, the ongoing GM cotton intentional introduction for contained and open field trials as well as public awareness and communication activities during the National Forum on the utilisation of GMOs and the Forum on the Biotechnology Policy Framework.
Most of these capacity building activities have benefitted from external support via bilateral and multilateral channels.
The procedure for obtaining GEF funding for new projects can be qualified as average due to the fact that the project development cycle is rigorous and long from project identification to project approval. However, once a project has been approved, the procedure for accessing GEF funds becomes easier. Cameroon has benefitted from GEF financial support in the development of its National Biosafety Framework and the ongoing Cameroon Biosecurity Project.
With respect to Government co-funding mechanism, the commitment is firm but the procedure for accessing the funds however remains very difficult.
Within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project, a needs assessment for capacity building of the biotechnology centres is envisaged.
So far, Cameroon has three (03) national experts enrolled on the list of biosafety experts in the BCH central portal. However the coordinates of these national biosafety experts are not found on the country profile of the BCH central portal.
Article 23 – Public awareness and participation
158. 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
Here you may provide further details
The Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law make provisions for public awareness and participation. Within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project, the development of a communication and awareness raising plan is ongoing and in progress.
159. Has your country designed and/or implemented an outreach/communication strategy on biosafety?
This question is relevant to indicator 5.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
160. Does your country have any awareness and outreach programmes on biosafety?
This question is relevant to indicator 5.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
161. If you answered Yes to question 160, please indicate what entity is responsible for carrying out the programmes and/or services and at which level the programmes take place (e.g. local, national, etc.):
This question is relevant to indicator 5.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
Within the information and awareness raising component of the Cameroon Biosecurity Project jointly managed by the Ministry of Scientific Research and Innovation and the Ministry of Environment, Protection of Nature and Sustainable Development, several outreach materials such as posters, flyers, notebooks and folders have been developed and disseminated. Further more, outreach activities such as press interviews, radio and television interviews have been carried out within the same component. These activities activities will be intensified with the putting in place of the communications and awareness raising strategy.
162. Has your country established a biosafety website searchable archives, national resource centres or sections in existing national libraries dedicated to biosafety educational materials?
This question is relevant to indicators 2.5.3 and 5.3.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
163. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 5.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
164. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure public access to information on living modified organisms that may be imported?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The white lists developed under the Cameroon Biosecurity Project once approved nationally could be disseminated to the general public and used for checks at the entry points. In case the species represented in the white lists could be genetically transformed, they should conform with the intentional introduction rules for LMOs as per the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law.
165. Has your country established a mechanism to consult the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st  of May 2007 on the application of the Law make provisions for this. Furthermore, the activities of the National Biosafety Committee with respect to the intentional introduction of GM cotton in the 3 Northern Regions of Cameroon have taken into consideration public participation in the decision-making process.
166. Has your country established a mechanism to make available to the public the results of decisions taken on LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
There are provisions in the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st   of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon and the Decree N° 2007/0737/PM of the 31st   of May 2007 on the application of the Law for rendering public decisions taken on LMOs.
However, the application of these provisions as of now is still limited to the regions of the 3 cotton producing zones of Northern Cameroon.
167. Has your country informed the public about existing modalities for public participation in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
Several sensitization activities are envisaged within the Cameroon Biosecurity Project. So far there have been the organisation of several forums on Biosafety issues in 2004, 2014 and 2015.
168. If you answered Yes to question 167, please indicate the modalities used to inform the public:
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Forums
169. If you indicated more than one modality for public participation in question 168, which one was most used?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Forums
170. Has your country taken any initiative to inform its public about the means of public access to the Biosafety Clearing-House?
  • No
171. How many academic institutions in your country are offering biosafety education and training courses and programmes?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.7.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
172. Please indicate the number of educational materials and/or online modules on biosafety that are available and accessible to the public in your country:
This question is relevant to indicators 2.7.2 and 5.3.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
173. 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 some extent
Here you may provide further details
This is evident in the inspection activities of the National Biosafety Committee and also within activities of the Cameroon Biosecurity Project
174. If you answered Yes to question 173, has your country cooperated with other States and international bodies?
  • Yes
175. 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?
  • Less than 5
176. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 23 in your country
Public participation on biosafety issues have been promoted via the organisation of forums as follows; in 2004 - the organisation of the forum in Limbe and the National Forum by the Cameroon Academy of Sciences  sponsored by MINEP (Ministy of Environment and Protection of Nature) /MINRESI, in 2010- the forum on GM cotton jointly sponsored by SODECOTON/BAYER, in 2014- the forum on the Biotechnology Policy Framework requested by the Ministry of Scientific Research and Innovation (MINRESI) sponsored by US National Academy  of Sciences and in 2015- the national forum on the utilisation of GMOs organised by the Ministry of Mines, Industries and Technological Development (MINMIDT).
There are educational materials for training on Biosafety in the form of lecture notes provided within the Master's Programme in Biotechnology, Biochemistry and the Molecular Diagnostics Course offered by the Universities of Yaoundé I and Buea. However, these educational materials are not available online.
With regards to the ongoing intentional introduction of GM cotton in the Northern Regions of Cameroon, public participation has been taken into consideration and implemented at least once per year for the 3 experimentation sites for the 3 years of confined field trials and the first year of the open field trials 2015.The decisions taken with respect to the intentional introduction of GM cotton has been made known to the public and authorities of the Northern regions.
Article 24 – Non-Parties
177. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreement with non-Parties regarding transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
178. Has your country ever imported LMOs from a non-Party?
  • No
179. Has your country ever exported LMOs to a non-Party?
  • No
Article 25 – Illegal transboundary movements
184. 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?
  • Yes
185. Has your country established a strategy for detecting illegal transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
186. 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?
If you replied Never to question 186 please go to question 191
  • Never
191. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country
Articles 60 - 64 of the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon regulate the illegal transboundary movements of LMOs.
However, there is an article published online under the Food and Nutrition Sciences website (Vol.5 No.10(2014), Article ID:45604,7 pages DOI:10.4236/fns.2014.510102) by Djoulde D. R and Sobda Gone titled "Evidence of the Presence of Genetically Modified Foods in the Sudano-Sahelian Zones of Cameroon". This article claims that there is an illegal transboundary movements of 5 GMOs in the Northern Regions of Cameroon.
Furthermore, a Master's Degree Thesis in Biochemistry by Ghepdeu Gisele in 2009 titled "Detection of Foreign Genes in Food Products in Cameroon: Case of Cereals and Cereal-based Products" also indicates that GMOs can be found in the commercial sector in Cameroon.
Article 26 – Socio-economic considerations
192. Does your country have any specific approaches or requirements that facilitate how socio-economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.7.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
193. 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
194. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.7.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • None
195. What is your country's experience, if any, in taking socio-economic considerations into account in LMO decision making? Please give details:
This question is relevant to indicator 1.7.3 of the Strategic Plan
Socio-economic considerations are regulated by articles 32 and 33 of the Law N° 2003/006 of the 21st  of  April 2003 to lay down safety regulations governing modern biotechnology in Cameroon. These considerations have been taken into account during decision making relating to the ongoing field trials on GM cotton.
196. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
The particpation of experts and farmers from Burkina Faso in conferences related to GM cotton held in Douala (2010) and Garoua (2014) reflect cooperation between Cameroon and other parties. Furthermore, visits of experts and representatives of the farmers association from Cameroon have been organised to Burkina Faso in relation to GM cotton intentional introduction.
197. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 26 in your country
The socio-economic, biological and environmental impacts of LMOs and Invasive Alien Species have been quantified under the Cameroon Biosecurity Project.
Article 27 – Liability and Redress
198. Has your country ratified or acceded to the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?
  • No
199. If you answered No to question 198, is there any national process in place towards becoming a Party?
  • Yes
200. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.4.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
201. Does your country have administrative or legal instrument that provide for response measures for damage to biodiversity resulting from living modified organisms?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.5.2 and 2.4.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
202. 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
Cameroon has not yet signed the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress. However the process has been initiated.
Cameroon has been represented in capacity building workshops in Addis-Ababa and Riga on the supplementary Protocol.
Response to damages on biodiversity resulting from LMOs is regulated by Article 10 of the 2003 Law on Modern Biotechnology.
In 2013, a concertation was organised in the Ministry of External Relations with respect to the signature of the Supplementary Protocol by Cameroon. The final decision is awaited.
Article 28 – Financial Mechanism and Resources
203. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • 500,000 USD or more
Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting
204. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system for the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.6 of the Strategic Plan
a) Monitoring system:
  • Yes
b) Enforcement system:
  • Yes
205. Has your country submitted all the previous due National Reports?
  • Yes
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.
There are ongoing biosafety activities in Cameroon. However, the effective implementation of the Protocol is hampered by some challenges such as; the lack of a sustainable funding mechanism for biosafety activities in Cameroon, poor internet services, the absence of timely uploaded information relating to biosafety activities on the national BCH portal.
The establishment of a Biosecurity Structure (Agency, Institute etc.) as a Biosecurity project outcome will be very beneficial for Cameroon.
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
There have been improvements on the format of the report eversince the second national biosafety report.
However, a major challenge encountered in filling the third national biosafety report involves the case of question 22 where two boxes had to be checked particularly when there were no changes since the previous report and the same response had to be applied.