EU urged to set up ethics watchdog

Date: 17/04/1997

By Rory Watson

PRESSURE is growing for the creation of a European watchdog to investigate and assess the ethical implications of biotechnological advances in the Union.

Supporters of the initiative, which has been given added impetus by public concern at the recent cloning of the Scottish sheep Dolly, aim to use draft legislation now being examined by MEPs to anchor the idea in European law.

They argue that proposed EU-wide rules on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions should be used to establish an independent committee made up of distinguished personalities with experience in fields ranging from the law to clinical genetics.

Such a committee would not only provide a forum for identifying the moral issues at stake, but also to complement the establishment of a clear regulatory framework for biotechnological patenting.

“Many people see ethical issues being raised in the draft patenting legislation and if these concerns are not taken on board by the creation of an ethics committee, then people who are now sitting on the fence may vote against the draft directive,” warned British Socialist MEP Ken Collins, chairman of the European Parliament's environment committee.

The biotechnology industry insists that EU legislation on patenting is essential for its well-being and, after unexpectedly rejecting earlier draft laws a few years ago, MEPs are under increasing pressure to approve the latest revised version.

Collins, who is keen to ensure the legislation is adopted, has moved to reassure an industry which fears an ethics committee could introduce unwanted obstacles to scientific advance by insisting that its role would be clearly set out. “You cannot have an ethical assessment of every patent application. It would just not be practical. Its role would be to look at developments and trends in biotechnological research,” he explained.

The idea is strongly supported by Alastair Kent of the UK-based Genetic Interest Group, who argues that the committee's remit could eventually be extended to address the wider relationship between biotechnology and human health, agriculture and the environment.

Kent's involvement reflects the growing influence which patient groups, representing those who could expect to benefit from biotechnological breakthroughs, are having on the debate.

“The committee could consider whether issues fall inside the boundaries of what is ethical. If they do, then there is no problem. If they do not, then we need a mechanism to establish whether the boundaries as currently established should be moved or not. If the answer is yes, then we move them. If not, then the line of investigation would be stopped at the very beginning,” said Kent.

The proposed committee might draw on the experience of the group of experts established by former European Commission President Jacques Delors in 1991 to advise the Union on the ethical implications of biotechnology.

The group, largely made up of professional ethicists and philosophers, has already produced opinions on sensitive issues and will plunge into the cloning debate tomorrow (18 April) by holding a round table in Brussels on the scientific, legal and ethical issues involved.

It has had a definite input into complex EU issues, but many feel its membership is too narrow, its work too secretive, its resources too stretched and its future too uncertain. Critics say the formal creation of an ethics committee would guarantee its status, enable it to draw on a broader range of opinion and allow it to play a greater role in EU policy-making.