abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

30 Sep 2015

European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, Kheti Virasat Mission, Pesticides Action Network Asia Pacific, Bread for the World & Berne Declaration

Ad Hoc Monitoring Report: Claims of (non-)adherence by Bayer CropScience and Syngenta to the Code of Conduct Provisions on Labeling, Personal Protective Equipment, Training, and Monitoring

See all tags

It is the view of the submitting organizations that the labels of the pesticides in question are in violation of the Code of Conduct, Guidelines on Good Labelling, various commitments made by the industry, as well as Indian law. The companies in question also appear to be violating the Code of Conduct, FAO Guidelines for Personal Protection when using Pesticides in Tropical Climates, and industry commitments to promotion of PPE and training....In addition, submitting organisations considered that even where companies applied the recommendations of the Code of Conduct and the Guidelines on Good Labelling on various issues such as font size, pictograms, and colour codes, farmers were in large part still unable to read and understand these labels. This is not in itself an outright violation by the companies of specific recommendations of the Code of Conduct but rather a contradiction of the recommendations of the Guidelines to its self-proclaimed objective to only advocate for labels that fulfil the requirement of clarity.