EU Court Advocate General Criticizes Dutch Pesticide Authorization for Ignoring Scientific Evidence

Advocate General Medina of the EU Court of Justice has criticized the Dutch pesticide authority Ctgb for using outdated guidelines and ignoring scientific evidence on the endocrine-disrupting effects of pesticides. The Advocate General insists that recent guidelines and all available scientific knowledge, regardless of the source, should be considered. This criticism comes in response to Ctgb's authorization of pesticides based on old guidelines, ignoring newer ones and refusing to consider independent studies on certain pesticides' harmful effects.

Dutch Ctgb and the EU Commission defended their position by arguing that a more thorough national assessment would disrupt pesticide harmonization. However, the Advocate General emphasized that national bodies must fully assess potential negative effects of pesticides, including recent scientific findings.

The Advocate General's advice may lead to significant changes in how Dutch Ctgb operates, with implications for national decisions regarding pesticides. This critique also highlights a gap between EU law and how national and EU pesticide authorities assess the harmful effects of pesticides, particularly those with proven negative impacts on health, biodiversity, and water quality, including glyphosate and 50 other "Candidates for Substitution."

MORE INFO ON www.pan-europe.info