我國基因改造食品法制化之探討

依美國人口調查局官方網站，在2012年3月所做的世界人口總數統計，世界人口總數已達70億人，並預估在2050年前會達到90億甚至到一百億之多，根據世界糧農組織統計2010年時全世界有9.25億的人營養不良。這個人口數目與日劇增的時代，要如何餵飽全世界那為數眾多的人口，所產生的糧食問題似乎成了我們人類首當其衝的議題。在全球經歷過許多災難後，糧食危機恐怕是繼石油後，成為造成世界經濟動亂、讓各國不得不重視的一大問題。由於基因改造食品涉及專業科學、經濟利益與政治上的糾葛，為了使人民意見能夠抵達政府決策之過程，並防止不當利益對於政策之干擾，政府決策體制的公開與透明便成為不可或缺的一環。基因改造食品屬於基因科技之一部分，故將來訂定基因科技法時，基因改造食品當然適用，目前基因科技法只有相關草案，概觀兼顧程序及時體規範，但重心至於事前管理之部分，事後之實體規範次之，然而基因科技係新型態之科技，其糾紛具有特殊性，故事後責任之規範仍然值得重視。學者在提出管制基因科技的同時，必須注重風險之分配，參考目前高科技對人的人格、身體、健康、生命權利的侵害及相關損害賠償，亦或參考各國相關管理辦法，完善規範基因科技。本文會先對食品之來源、基因、基因改造的發展做探討，再討論基因改造作物的可專利性，與發生的基因改造食品爭議，最後討論各國的基因改造管理制度，並做比較，從中分析若要發展基因改造作物相關法規會面臨之難題，如何解決方為恰當，與現行法制作一配合。

關鍵字

生物安全議定書；基因；基因改造食品；可專利化；管理制度；國際條約

並列摘要

The most common concerns about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) among environmentalists, doctors, scientists, and public interest advocates have to do with the health risks they might pose, the environmental pollution they might cause, and the biodiversity they might threaten. For example, genetically engineered crops could pollinate with other plant life making them genetically engineered, as well; GM crops that contain their own pesticides often kill more than their targeted insects, producing a chain reaction of unintended consequences, among them pesticide resistant “super-pests”; GM crops designed to be herbicide resistant (so that large amounts of strong weed killer can be safely used on them) have already spread to related weed species, which then also pick up the resistance to the herbicides and become “super-weeds” that are difficult to control. There is also the possibility of creating new strands of “super-viruses” as the genes of viral resistant plants are passed on to other plants. Finally, there is the danger of GE crops threatening regional biodiversity as single, mono-crops are imported and transplanted into foreign ecosystems. As philosophers and citizens we can call attention to the political character of our laws, policies, and institutions to show that economic practices also involve political choices, embodying political ideas, and are thus open to political deliberation and transformation. You don’t have to be an expert to know that there are some things that shouldn’t be privatized – and that’s what’s wrong with genetically modified food.