Eliminating the most hazardous pesticides in Latin America

In April 2004, the Peruvian government issued a new law No. 26217 entitled Actions to strengthen post-registration control of pesticides in agricultural use(1). This followed several years of high profile debate in the country over the need to increase controls over extremely and highly hazardous pesticides (WHO Classes Ia and Ib), most notably since the death of 24 children in 1999, poisoned by parathion (PN 46 p3). The new law prioritises measures to reduce or prohibit the use of Class Ia and Ib pesticides, and others which represent unacceptable risks for health or environment, under conditions of use in Peru. Measures include: putting the onus on agrochemical companies for disposal of pesticide containers and obsolete stocks; improving quality control; monitoring of residues in food; and reviewing current pesticide health monitoring, as well as promotion of Integrated Pest Management (IPM), organic farming and alternatives to use of pesticides. 
    PAN Peru group RAAA convened a meeting of consumer, farmer and environmental organisations to analyse the implications of the new law and deliver civil society recommendations to the authorities. They welcomed the law as a first step towards reducing the harm inflicted by Class Ia and Ib ‘red label’ products sold on the Peruvian market but highlighted important shortcomings that need to be addressed. These were:

• lack of political will to instigate a ban on Class Ia products
• no requirement for pesticide labels to be written in Spanish
• risk assessment could be easily done through published work from other countries, rather than waiting to carry to out expensive studies in Peru
• use of pesticides in home and garden or public health is not covered
  l lack of clarity on which government agency is responsible for implementation and no set system of penalties for infringement, and 
• focus is entirely on the agricultural sector, excluding important awareness-raising roles in health and education sectors(2). RAAA is now setting up a Working Group with representatives from farmers, consumers and rural development organisations to demand a more progressive interpretation of the law and monitor its implementation.

Paraguay banned the import and use of the organophosphate insecticides methyl and ethyl parathion (Class Ia), monocrotophos and methamidophos (Class Ib) in 2003(3). This legislation was welcomed by PAN group Altervida who had been campaigning specifically against these pesticides since 2002. Meanwhile, in Central America PAN groups pressurised health authorities to address the serious issue of pesticide poisoning in the region, in which 400,000 acute poisonings take place each year according to the Pan-American Health Organisation. Health ministries in seven countries have collaborated since 2000 to tighten controls on 12 active ingredients of major concern, eight of which are Class Ia and Ib compounds. Central America’s ‘most damaging dozen’ are: terbufos, methyl parathion, ethoprofos, aldicarb, monocrotophos, methomyl, methamidophos, carbofuran, endosulfan, paraquat, chlorpyrifos and aluminium phosphate. Recent progress includes technical training on less toxic and non-chemical alternatives to these twelve pesticides(40. 

1. Ley para reforzar las acciones de control post registro de plaguicidas quimicos de uso agricola, published in Diario El Peruano 01 May 2004
2. Civil society organisations meet to analyse post-registration control law (in Spanish). Red de Accion en Alternativas al uso de Agroquímicos, Lima, Peru, 2004 http://www.raaa.org/Ley%20plaguicidas.htm
3. Paraguay prohibits very dangerous pesticides: parathion, monocrotophos and methamidophos (in Spanish). Enlace 62 p.7, PAN Latin America, Santiago, Chile, 2003.
4. Proven alternatives to substitute the twelve most harmful pesticides in Central America (in Spanish). Report of the technical workshop held June 2003, Managua, Nicaragua. RAP Central America, RAPAC/UNES, San Salvador, 2003.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 65, September 2004, page 18]