Though not unexpected, the suit exposes the threat posed to the agrochemical giants when local people rise up in opposition to the destructive nature of their business model. (Photo credit: Ian MacKenzie/flickr/cc)
Nov 14, 2014
Alongside other plaintiffs, two of the world's most powerful agrochemical companies, Monsanto and Dow Chemical, filed suit against Maui County in Hawaii on Thursday, less than two weeks after voters there approved a moratorium on the planting and cultivation of genetically-modified crops within the boundaries of their communities.
"This local referendum interferes with and conflicts with long established state and federal laws that support both the safety and lawful cultivation of GMO plants. For this reason, we believe it is invalid and should never become law," said John P. Purcell, Monsanto of Hawaii's vice president of business and technology.
The legal effort to blog the approved initiative came one day after supporters of the GMO planting ban filed a motion of their own with local courts seeking "transparency and proper implementation" of the moratorium approved by the November 4th referendum victory.
Leading up to the referendum vote, Monsanto and other large agricultural interests dumped millions of dollars into the effort to defeat the local initiative. Given the stakes, it is no surprise that the legal challenges came swiftly.
The official complaint filed by Monsanto and the other plaintiffs against Maui County:
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Alongside other plaintiffs, two of the world's most powerful agrochemical companies, Monsanto and Dow Chemical, filed suit against Maui County in Hawaii on Thursday, less than two weeks after voters there approved a moratorium on the planting and cultivation of genetically-modified crops within the boundaries of their communities.
"This local referendum interferes with and conflicts with long established state and federal laws that support both the safety and lawful cultivation of GMO plants. For this reason, we believe it is invalid and should never become law," said John P. Purcell, Monsanto of Hawaii's vice president of business and technology.
The legal effort to blog the approved initiative came one day after supporters of the GMO planting ban filed a motion of their own with local courts seeking "transparency and proper implementation" of the moratorium approved by the November 4th referendum victory.
Leading up to the referendum vote, Monsanto and other large agricultural interests dumped millions of dollars into the effort to defeat the local initiative. Given the stakes, it is no surprise that the legal challenges came swiftly.
The official complaint filed by Monsanto and the other plaintiffs against Maui County:
Alongside other plaintiffs, two of the world's most powerful agrochemical companies, Monsanto and Dow Chemical, filed suit against Maui County in Hawaii on Thursday, less than two weeks after voters there approved a moratorium on the planting and cultivation of genetically-modified crops within the boundaries of their communities.
"This local referendum interferes with and conflicts with long established state and federal laws that support both the safety and lawful cultivation of GMO plants. For this reason, we believe it is invalid and should never become law," said John P. Purcell, Monsanto of Hawaii's vice president of business and technology.
The legal effort to blog the approved initiative came one day after supporters of the GMO planting ban filed a motion of their own with local courts seeking "transparency and proper implementation" of the moratorium approved by the November 4th referendum victory.
Leading up to the referendum vote, Monsanto and other large agricultural interests dumped millions of dollars into the effort to defeat the local initiative. Given the stakes, it is no surprise that the legal challenges came swiftly.
The official complaint filed by Monsanto and the other plaintiffs against Maui County:
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.