Kazakhstan | BCH-NR2-KZ-102592 | Second National Report on the Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

General Information

Country

Kazakhstan

Contact person submitting the report

To view the current National Focal Point information, click here.

9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report

EN

10. Time period covered by this report

From

07 Dec 2008

To

26 Oct 2011

Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

12. Is your country a Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB)?

13. If you answered No to question 12, is there any national process in place towards becoming a Party?

14. Here you may provide further details

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

EN

16. Which specific instruments are in place for the implementation of your national biosafety framework?

One or more sets of biosafety guidelines
Other laws, regulations or guidelines that indirectly apply to biosafety

17. Has your country established a mechanism for the budgetary allocations of funds for the operation of its national biosafety framework?

No

EN

18. Does your country have permanent staff to administer functions directly related to the national biosafety framework?

No

EN

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?

20. Has your country’s biosafety framework / laws / regulations / guidelines been submitted to the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)?

No

EN

21. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 2 in your country:

On June17, 2008 The Government of Kazakhstan adopted and ratified the Law «On Ratification of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity» (№ 43-IV). The Government of Kazakhstan, according to decree № 1282 dated December 26, 2008, has designated the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan (MA RK)  as the National Focal Point for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB), the Ministry of Education and Science (MES) of RK as the Competent National Authority, «National Center for Biotechnology» as the Biosafety Clearing-House Focal Point of CPB.<br />In Kazakhstan, the compulsory registration of genetically modified products, imported into the territory of Kazakhstan, was provided by the Law of RK «On Food Safety and Quality» (2004).<br />The new Law of RK «On safety of food products» that came into force on January1, 2008,and the Code of RK «On public health and the health care system of RK» that came into force onSeptember18, 2009, regulate the state control of food safety, labeling and registration of GMOs.The Ecological Code (2009) regulatesthe ecological requirements for production and use of potentially hazardous chemical and biological agents, GM products and organisms. The Law of RK «On Protection of Consumers' Rights»,whichcame into force on May 4, 2010,requires manufacturers to labelproducts containing 0.9 or more percent of GMOs. The Law of RK«On state regulation of genetic engineering» has been drafted (currently, the draft is pending in the Parliament).<br />

EN

Article 5 – Pharmaceuticals

22. Does your country regulate the transboundary movement, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) which are pharmaceuticals?

No

EN

23. If you answered Yes to question 22, has this information been submitted to the BCH?

24. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 5 in your country:

Article 6 – Transit and Contained use

25. Does your country regulate the transit of LMOs?

No

EN

26. Does your country regulate the contained use of LMOs?

No

EN

27. If you answered Yes to questions 25 or 26, has this information been submitted to the BCH?

28. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 6 in your country:

  Article 6 is partly implemented in accordance with the Government Decrees of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 16, 2008 № 346 «Rules for execution of works based on scientifically proved verification of safety of the genetically modified objects» and dated June 27, 2007 № 630 «Rules for circulation of genetically modified objects» in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan».                                                   

EN

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

EN

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

EN

31. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions regarding first intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?

No

EN

32. If you answered Yes to question 31, does the mechanism also apply to cases of intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment that were not subject to transboundary movement?

33. Has your country established a mechanism for monitoring potential effects of LMOs that are released into the environment?

No

EN

34. Does your country have the capacity to detect and identify LMOs?

Yes

EN

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

EN

36. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information contained in the notification?

No

EN

37. Has your country ever received an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?

No

EN

38. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?

No

EN

39. If you answered Yes to question 38, how many LMOs has your country approved to date for import for intentional introduction into the environment?

40. If you answered Yes to question 38, how many LMOs, not imported, has your country approved to date for intentional introduction into the environment?

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

EN

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

EN

43. With reference to the decisions taken on intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment, has your country received a notification from the Party(ies) of export or from the exporter(s) prior to the transboundary movement?

44. Did the notifications contain complete information (at a minimum the information specified in Annex I of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety)?

45. Has your country acknowledged receipt of the notifications to the notifier within ninety days of receipt?

46. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s)?

47. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s) in due time (within 270 days or the period specified in your communication to the notifier)?

48. What percentage of your country’s decisions fall into the following categories?

49. In cases where your country approved an import with conditions or prohibited an import, did it provide reasons on which its decisions were based to the notifier and the BCH?

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:

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

EN

52. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?

No

EN

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

EN

54. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions on the import of LMOs-FFP?

No

EN

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

EN

56. Has your country indicated its needs for financial and technical assistance and capacity building in respect of LMOs-FFP?

No

EN

57. Has your country ever taken a decision on LMOs-FFP (either on import or domestic use)?

No

EN

58. How many LMOs-FFP has your country approved to date?

59. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding the import of LMOs-FFP?

60. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?

61. Has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of its decision(s) regarding import, of LMOs-FFP?

62. Has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of its decision(s) regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP within 15 days?

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:

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

EN

65. Has your country ever received a request for a review of a decision?

No

EN

66. Has your country ever reviewed / changed a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?

No

EN

67. In the current reporting period, how many decisions were reviewed and/or changed regarding an intentional transboundary movement of an LMO?

None

EN

68. Has your country informed the notifier and the BCH of the review and/or changes in the decision?

69. Has your country informed the notifier and the BCH of the review and changes in the decision within thirty days?

70. Has your country provided reasons to the notifier and the BCH for the review and/or changes in the decision?

71. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 12 in your country:

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

EN

73. Has your country ever applied the simplified procedure?

No

EN

74. If you answered Yes to question 73, has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of the cases where the simplified procedure applies?

75. In the current reporting period, how many LMOs has your country applied the simplified procedure to?

None

EN

76. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 13 in your country:

Article 14 – Bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements

77. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements?

No

EN

78. If you answered Yes to question 77, has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of the agreements or arrangements?

79. If you answered Yes to question 77, please provide a brief description of the scope and objective of the agreements or arrangements entered into:

80. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 14 in your country:

Article 15 – Risk assessment

81. Has your country established a mechanism for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?

No

EN

82. If you answered Yes to question 81, does this mechanism include procedures for identifying experts to conduct the risk assessments?

83. Has your country established guidelines for how to conduct risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?

No

EN

84. Has your country acquired the necessary domestic capacity to conduct risk assessment?

No

EN

85. Has your country established a mechanism for training national experts to conduct risk assessments?

No

EN

86. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO for intentional introduction into the environment?

No

EN

87. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?

No

EN

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?

n/a

EN

89. Has your country submitted summary reports of the risk assessments to the BCH?

n/a

EN

90. In the current reporting period, if your country has taken decisions regarding LMOs, how many risk assessments were conducted in the context of these decisions?

None

EN

91. Has your country ever required the exporter to conduct the risk assessment(s)?

n/a

EN

92. Has your country ever required the notifier to bear the cost of the risk assessment(s) of LMOs?

n/a

EN

93. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 15 in your country:

According to the Government Decree of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated September 21, 2010 № 969, the technical regulation «Safety requirements for food products derived from genetically modified (transgenic) plants and animals» was approved. It determines the risk assessment in laboratory studies, as well as acceptable risks with respect to food products.

EN

Article 16 – Risk management

94.1. LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?

No

EN

94.2. LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?

No

EN

95. Has your country established and maintained appropriate measures to prevent unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?

No

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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:

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

104. Has your country notified affected or potentially affected States, the BCH and, where appropriate, relevant international organizations, of the above release?

105. If you answered Yes to question 104, who did your country notify?

106. 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?

107. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 17 in your country:

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?

Yes, to some extent

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

113. Does your country have the capacity to enforce the requirements of identification and documentation of LMOs?

Yes, to some extent

EN

114. Has your country established procedures for the sampling and detection of LMOs?

Yes, to some extent

EN

115. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 18 in your country:

Circulation of food products derived from genetically modified (transgenic) plants and animals, is executed in compliance with technical regulations «Safety requirements for food products derived from genetically modified (transgenic) plants and animals» approved by the Government Decree of the Republic of Kazakhstan № 969 dated September 21,2010 and «Requirements for packaging, marking, labeling and proper application» approved by the Government Decree № 277 dated 21 March, 2004, and in accordance with the Rules for Circulation of Genetically Modified Objects approved by the Government Decree of the Republic of Kazakhstan № 630 dated June 27, 2008                                                                                   

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

119. In case your country designated more than one competent national authority, has your country conveyed to the Secretariat the respective responsibilities of those authorities?

120. Has your country made available the required information referred in questions 116-119 to the BCH?

Yes, some information

EN

121. 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?

122. Has your country established adequate institutional capacity to enable the competent national authority(ies) to perform the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?

No

EN

123. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 19 in your country:

The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, according to decree № 1282 dated December 26, 2008, has designated the Ministry of Agriculture of RK as the National Focal Point for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB), the Ministry of Education and Science of RK as the Competent National Authority, «National Center for Biotechnology»as the Biosafety Clearing-House Focal Point of CPB.

EN

Article 20 – Information Sharing and the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)

124.a. Existing national legislation, regulations and guidelines for implementing the Protocol, as well as information required by Parties for the advance informed agreement procedure (Article 20, paragraph 3 (a))

Information not available

EN

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

EN

124.c. Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements (Articles 14, paragraph 2 and 20, paragraph 3 (b))

Information not available

EN

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

EN

124.e. Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))

Information not available

EN

124.f. Decisions by a Party on regulating the transit of specific living modified organisms (LMOs) (Article 6, paragraph 1)

Information not available

EN

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

EN

124.h. Illegal transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 25, paragraph 3)

Information not available

EN

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

EN

124.j. Information on the application of domestic regulations to specific imports of LMOs (Article 14, paragraph 4)

Information not available

EN

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

EN

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

EN

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

EN

124.n. Review and change of decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 12, paragraph 1)

Information not available

EN

124.o. LMOs granted exemption status by each Party (Article 13, paragraph 1)

Information not available

EN

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

EN

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

EN

125. Has your country established a mechanism for strengthening the capacity of the BCH National Focal Point to perform its administrative functions?

No

EN

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?

No

EN

127. Does your country use the information available in the BCH in its decision making processes on LMOs?

No

EN

128. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?

129. If you answered Yes to question 128, has your country reported these problems to the BCH or the Secretariat?

n/a

EN

130. Is the information submitted by your country to the BCH complete and up-to date?

No

EN

131. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country:

Article 21 – Confidential information

132. Has your country established procedures to protect confidential information received under the Protocol?

No

EN

133. Does your country allow the notifier to identify information that is to be treated as confidential?

No

EN

134. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 21 in your country:

Information confidentiality is provided in the draft law «On state regulation of genetic engineering», which is in currently in the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

EN

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?

No

EN

136. If you answered Yes to question 135, how were these resources made available?

137. Has your country provided support to other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?

No

EN

138. If you answered Yes to question 137, how were these resources made available?

139. Is your country eligible to receive funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF)?

Yes

EN

140. Has your country ever initiated a process to access GEF funds for building capacity in biosafety?

Yes

EN

141. If you answered Yes to question 140, how would you characterize the process?

Average

EN

142. Has your country ever received funding from the GEF for building capacity in biosafety?

Development of national biosafety frameworks

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

EN

144. If you answered Yes to question 143, in which of the following areas were these activities undertaken?

Human resources capacity development and training
Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
Identification of LMOs, including their detection
Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
Taking into account risks to human health

145. During the current reporting period, has your country carried out a capacity-building needs assessment?

No

EN

146. Does your country still have capacity-building needs?

Yes

EN

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
Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
Taking into account risks to human health

148. Has your country developed a capacity-building strategy or action plan?

No

EN

149. Has your country submitted the details of national biosafety experts to the Roster of Experts in the BCH?

No

EN

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:

Article 23 – Public awareness and participation

151. Has your country established a strategy or put in place legislation for promoting and facilitating public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?

No

EN

152. Has your country established a biosafety website?

No

EN

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

EN

154. Has your country established a mechanism to consult the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs?

No

EN

155. Has your country established a mechanism to make available to the public the results of decisions taken on LMOs?

No

EN

156. Has your country taken any initiative to inform its public about the means of public access to the Biosafety Clearing-House?

No

EN

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

EN

158. If you answered Yes to question 157, has your country cooperated with other States and international bodies?

n/a

EN

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

EN

160. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 23 in your country:

The Republic of Kazakhstan ratified the Aarhus Convention by the Law of RK «On Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters» on October 23, 2000 № 92-II. <a href="http://www.aarhus.kz/">http://www.aarhus.kz/</a>

EN

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

EN

162. Has your country ever imported LMOs from a non-Party?

No

EN

163. Has your country ever exported LMOs to a non-Party?

No

EN

164. If you answered Yes to questions 162 or 163, were the transboundary movements of LMOs consistent with the objective of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?

165. If you answered Yes to questions 162 or 163, was information about these transboundary movements submitted to the BCH?

166. If your country is not a Party to the Cartagena Protocol, has it contributed information to the BCH on LMOs released in, or moved into, or out of, areas within its national jurisdiction?

n/a

EN

167. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 24 in your country:

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

EN

169. Has your country established a strategy for detecting illegal transboundary movements of LMOs?

No

EN

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

EN

171. Has your country informed the BCH and the other Party(ies) involved?

172. Has your country established the origin of the LMO(s)?

173. Has your country established the nature of the LMO(s)?

174. Has your country established the circumstances of the illegal transboundary movement(s)?

175. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country:

Article 26 – Socio-economic considerations

176. If your country has taken a decision on import, has it ever taken into account socio-economic considerations arising from the impact of the LMO on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?

Not applicable

EN

177. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?

No

EN

178. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 26 in your country:

Article 27 – Liability and Redress

179. Has your country signed the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?

No

EN

180. Has your country initiated steps towards ratification, acceptance or approval of the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol?

No

EN

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:

Currently, consultations are being held for the preparation of signing of Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur supplementary protocol on liability and redress

EN

Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting

182. Has your country submitted the previous national reports (Interim and First National Reports)?

No

EN

183. If your country did not submit previous reports, indicate the main challenges that hindered the submission

No obligation to submit (e.g. country was not a Party at the time)

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.

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.

Survey on indicators of the Strategic Plan (2014)

3. When did your national biosafety framework become operational?

viewNationalReportT.additionalInformation

Science and technology programs conducted in the Republic of Kazakhstan in the field of Biotechnology in 2009-2011-(Program #1 -Development and utilization of genetic engineering and cell biotechnologies in medicine, agriculture, environmental protection, food and processing industries; Program #2- Scientific and technological proviion of state regulation for the use of genetically modified objects; Program #3 - development and intruduction of volecular, genetic and bioengineering methods for accelerated development of new high crop varieties to further strenthen the country's food safety. 30 scientific organizations and universities participate in the implemetation of programs in biotechnology. 85 projects are being implemented.

EN

4. How many biosafety short-term training programmes and/or academic courses are offered annually in your country?

None

EN

5. Does your country have in place a functional national mechanism for coordinating biosafety capacity-building initiatives?

No

EN

6. How much additional funding (in the equivalent of US dollars) has your country mobilized in the last four years to support implementation of the Biosafety Protocol, beyond the regular national budgetary allocation?

1,000,000 USD or more

EN

7. Does your country have predictable and reliable funding for building capacity for the effective implementation of the Protocol?

No

EN

8. How many LMO-related collaborative bilateral/multilateral arrangements has your country established with other Parties/non-Parties?

None

EN

9.a. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment and/or risk management? Risk assessment

No

EN

9.b. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment and/or risk management? Risk management

No

EN

10. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?

No

EN

11. Has your country adopted any common approaches to risk assessment with other countries?

No

EN

12. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO?

No

EN

13.a. Does your country have the capacity to identify, assess and/or monitor living modified organisms or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health? Identify

Yes

EN

13.b. Does your country have the capacity to identify, assess and/or monitor living modified organisms or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health? Assess

Yes

EN

13.c. Does your country have the capacity to identify, assess and/or monitor living modified organisms or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health? Monitor

No

EN

14. Does your country have available any guidance for the purpose of ensuring the safe handling, transport, and packaging of living modified organisms?

Yes

EN

viewNationalReportT.additionalInformation

Rules of work on scientific and reasonable confirm the safety of genetically modified objects. Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on April 16, 2008, # 346

EN

15. Does your country have any specific approaches or requirements that facilitate how socio-economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making?

No

EN

16. How many peer-reviewed published materials has your country used for the purpose of elaborating or determining national actions with regard to socio-economic considerations?

None

EN

17. What is your country's experience, if any, in taking socio-economic considerations into account in LMO decision making?

N/A

EN

18. Does your country have the capacity to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released?

No

EN

19.a. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs? Risk assessment

One or more

EN

19.b. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs? Monitoring

One or more

EN

19.c. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs? Management / Control

One or more

EN

20. Does your country have the infrastructure (e.g. laboratory facilities) for monitoring or managing LMOs?

Yes

EN

21. Is your country using training material and/or technical guidance for training in risk assessment and risk management of LMOs?

No

EN

22.a. Are the available training materials and technical guidance on risk assessment and risk management of LMOs sufficient and effective? Sufficient

No

EN

22.b. Are the available training materials and technical guidance on risk assessment and risk management of LMOs sufficient and effective? Effective

No

EN

23. How many customs officers in your country have received training in the identification of LMOs?

None

EN

24. How many laboratory personnel in your country have received training in detection of LMOs?

10 or more

EN

viewNationalReportT.additionalInformation

As part of the project "Technology Transfer and Institutional Reform in the Health sector of Kazakhstan ", implemented by the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Kazakhstan (MH RK) with the support of the World Bank, in April 2012 has trained 11 specialists’ laboratories on the basis of Milan University Degli Studi Di Milano. In September 2012, on the basis of the State Enterprise "Scientific and Practical Center for Epidemiological Inspection and Monitoring " of the Committee of State Sanitary and Epidemiological Surveillance of the MH RK in Almaty, specialists Milan University Degli Studi Di Milano trained in the workplace 15 specialists from Kazakhstan

EN

25. Does your country have reliable access to laboratory facilities for the detection of LMOs?

Yes

EN

26. How many laboratories in your country are certified for LMO detection?

5 or more

EN

viewNationalReportT.additionalInformation

1. State Enterprise "Center for Epidemiological Inspection of Astana " of the Committee for State Sanitary and Epidemiological Surveillance of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Kazakhstan (CSSES MH RK); 2. State Enterprise «East Kazakhstan Regional Center for Sanitary and Epidemiological Examination " of the CSSES MH RK; 3. State Enterprise "West Kazakhstan regional center of sanitary and epidemiological expertise" of the CSSES MH RK; 4. State Enterprise " North Kazakhstan Regional Centre for Sanitary and Epidemiological Examination " of the CSSES MH RK; 5. State Enterprise "Scientific and Practical Center for Epidemiological Inspection and Monitoring " of the CSSES MH RK; 6. LLP " Nutritest " on the basis of the Kazakh Academy of Nutrition; 7. National Center for Biotechnology of the Science Committee of the Ministry Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

EN

27. How many of the certified laboratories in the previous question are operational?

5 or more

EN

28. Has your country received any financial and/or technical assistance for capacity-building in the area of liability and redress relating to living modified organisms?

No

EN

29. Does your country have administrative or legal instrument that provide for response measures for damage to biodiversity resulting from living modified organisms?

No

EN

30. Has your country informed the public about existing modalities for public participation in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms?

No

EN

31. If you answered yes to the previous question, please indicate the modalities used to inform the public?

5B6177DD-5E5E-434E-8CB7-D63D67D5EBED (N/A)

32. If you indicated multiple modalities for public participation in the question above, which one was most used?

33. How many academic institutions in your country are offering biosafety education and training courses and programmes?

None

EN

34. How many biosafety training materials and/or online modules are available in your country?

One or more

EN

35.a. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system? Monitoring system

No

EN

35.b. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system? Enforcement system

No

EN

36. Please indicate the number of regional, national and international events organized in relation to biosafety (e.g. seminars, workshops, press conferences, educational events, etc.,) in the last 2 years.

None

EN

37. Please indicate the number of biosafety related publications that has been made available in your country in the last year.

One or more

EN

38. If biosafety related publications were made available (see question above), please indicate which modalities were preferred.

BCH Central Portal

39. How many collaborative initiatives (including joint activities) on the Cartagena Protocol and other Conventions and processes has your government established in the last 4 years?

None

EN

40. Does your country have any awareness and outreach programmes on biosafety?

No

EN

41. If you answered yes to the question above, please indicate what entity is responsible for carrying out the programmes and/or services and at which level the programmes take place.

N/A

EN

42. Has your country designed and/or implemented an outreach/communication strategy on biosafety?

No

EN

43. Please indicate the number of educational materials on biosafety that are available and accessible to the public.

None

EN

This record has been deleted. Since it is linked to a published record, it is available here for reference purposes only.

This document has been updated. This is not the latest published version. Click here to view the latest version of the record.

Comparing version with latest version 6

Quick links

Need help?

THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

Quick Links

Topics

Information

A part of

This record has been deleted. Since it is linked to a published record, it is available here for reference purposes only.

This document has been updated. This is not the latest published version. Click here to view the latest version of the record.

Comparing version with latest version 6 Close comparison

Quick links

Need help?

THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

Quick Links

Topics

Information

A part of

Comparing version with latest version 6