Revealed: A Secret Monsanto Document In The Maui GMO Case

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Imag­ine you are a lawyer argu­ing a case before a judge. There is no jury. The judge will decide the outcome.

The judge tells you, “Look, the oth­er side, your oppo­nents in this case, have filed doc­u­ments with me. These doc­u­ments are at the heart of their argu­ment. I can’t allow you to read the doc­u­ments. I can only give you access to heav­i­ly redact­ed ver­sions. You’ll have to do the best you can. I have read the full doc­u­ments. Your oppo­nents, of course, know every word of those doc­u­ments. But you don’t. And you won’t. Good luck. Limp along as well as you can.”

That’s what we’re talk­ing about here.

(The link to the doc­u­ment is locat­ed at the bot­tom of this article.)

Last Elec­tion Day, the peo­ple of Maui Coun­ty vot­ed to halt all local GMO and pes­ti­cide exper­i­men­ta­tion being car­ried out by Mon­san­to and Dow.

Dur­ing the tem­po­rary halt, a com­plete inde­pen­dent inves­ti­ga­tion would be done, to find out exact­ly how harm­ful the pes­ti­cides and GMOs were.

But the legal and bind­ing vote was sus­pend­ed, because Mon­san­to and Dow imme­di­ate­ly sued.

The case is now hung up in Fed­er­al Court.

I’ve just learned that Mon­san­to filed doc­u­ments “under seal,” to make its case in the pro­ceed­ing now before Fed­er­al Judge Susan Oki Moll­way.

Mon­san­to request­ed the court make the doc­u­ments secret, and the pre­vi­ous Judge, Bar­ry Kur­ren, agreed to it.

Here, in legalese, is Kurren’s decision:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plain­tiffs’ ex parte appli­ca­tion is GRANTED. Accord­ing­ly, the sub­ject dec­la­ra­tions shall be filed by the Court under seal, and redact­ed ver­sions may be filed with the Plain­tiffs’ Motion.’”

That means the lawyers for the vot­ers of Maui can’t see those Mon­san­to doc­u­ments. Not in full. They can only read redact­ed ver­sions of Mon­san­to mak­ing its case for con­tin­ued GMO/pesticide exper­i­ments on Maui—contravening the demands of Maui voters.

What kind of court is this?

Judge Moll­way, who will decide the case, can read every­thing Mon­san­to offers in its defense, but the lawyers against Mon­san­to have no full access and, there­fore, can’t argue their side from full knowledge.

This echoes of cas­es where pros­e­cu­tors claim “nation­al secu­ri­ty” as an issue. In those instances, doc­u­ments are either exclud­ed as evi­dence, or only redact­ed ver­sions are allowed in.

Is this what we’re deal­ing with here? Monsanto’s con­cerns have become, in a fed­er­al court, a mat­ter of nation­al security?

Below, you will see a link to one such redact­ed Mon­san­to doc­u­ment. You will see the many blacked out lines.

One sec­tion (no.7) states: “…Mon­san­to cur­rent­ly owns or leas­es approx­i­mate­ly 784 acres of farm­land on the island. Cer­tain spe­cif­ic loca­tions on Maui are unique­ly suit­able to mul­ti-sea­son/­cy­cle breed­ing and research.” The next 14 lines of the sec­tion are blacked out.

It’s not much of a stretch to infer those 14 lines are blacked out to con­ceal Maui loca­tions of Mon­san­to facil­i­ties. You mean the address­es and names of Mon­san­to sta­tions and grow­ing fields on Maui are a secret?

Sup­pose, in your city, in your region, a major cor­po­ra­tion was car­ry­ing out, on a reg­u­lar basis, exper­i­ments with new, non-com­mer­cial, tox­ic pes­ti­cide chem­i­cals and genet­i­cal­ly altered organ­ic mate­ri­als. And sup­pose you were told that the per­ma­nent facil­i­ties of that cor­po­ra­tion in your region were locat­ed at secret sites. How would you feel about it?

Wouldn’t that raise sig­nif­i­cant sus­pi­cions in your mind? Wouldn’t you want to know exact­ly what was going on at each and every one of those facil­i­ties? And if you were denied that infor­ma­tion, as well as the names and address­es of the loca­tions, wouldn’t you infer the secre­cy was cov­er­ing up some­thing harm­ful to you?

Whole sec­tions of the Mon­san­to court doc­u­ment are blacked out (e.g., no. 8 and 9). What do they say? Only the Judge and Mon­san­to know. The lawyers rep­re­sent­ing the vot­ers of Maui don’t have a clue.

Sec­tion 10 states: “The cur­rent [Mon­san­to] work­force in the Coun­ty [of Maui] has been trained over many years at the pre­cise pol­li­na­tion tech­niques required and to per­form oth­er spe­cial­ized tasks.” The next two lines are blacked out. Why? Because Mon­san­to con­sid­ers fur­ther expla­na­tion of what these work­ers do to be pro­pri­etary secrets? This is what the Maui vot­ers want to know about, because they, the peo­ple of Maui, are on the receiv­ing end of the secret wind-blown pes­ti­cide and GMO exper­i­ments.

Sec­tion 11 of the court doc­u­ment is quite strange. It states: “And the US Depart­ment of Agri­cul­ture [USDA] sets require­ments for how reg­u­lat­ed field tri­als of new GE [genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered] crops must be con­duct­ed.” The next 12 lines are blacked out. Why? Are the USDA reg­u­la­tions them­selves a secret? Is there some­thing about these reg­u­la­tions Mon­san­to doesn’t want the pub­lic to know? The “field tri­als” are at the heart of what the peo­ple of Maui are object­ing to. How tox­ic are the secret exper­i­men­tal pes­ti­cides? How dan­ger­ous to health are the secret exper­i­men­tal GMOs?

Sec­tion 13 men­tions a corn-crop dis­ease called Goss’s Wilt. Then, six lines are blacked out. Why? What is Mon­san­to hid­ing from the peo­ple of Maui?

How in the world can the lawyers rep­re­sent­ing the vot­ers of Maui argue their case in fed­er­al court when all this infor­ma­tion is being with­held from them? The answer: they can’t.

Is some of Monsanto’s fed­er­al­ly fund­ed biowar­fare research (con­tract­ed by the US Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health)—the details of which Mon­san­to won’t dis­close—tak­ing place on Maui?

The lawyers rep­re­sent­ing the peo­ple of Maui should be fil­ing new motions to declare this case an impos­si­ble trav­es­ty. Until the lawyers can read every word of the doc­u­ments Mon­san­to has filed with the court, there is no case, there is no pro­ceed­ing, there is only a con job, with Mon­san­to the pre­or­dained win­ner by default.

And until the alter­na­tive media cov­ers the Mon­san­to-Maui case and blows it up into the scan­dal it is, there will be no chance of justice.

Here is a link to the Mon­san­to court doc­u­ment I’ve been refer­ring to (Dec­la­ra­tion of Sam Eath­ing­ton, Vice Pres­i­dent of Glob­al Plant Breed­ing, Mon­san­to):

Declaration of Sam Eathington, Vice President of Global Plant Breeding, Monsanto