US SENATORS' RESPONSE TO GOVERNORS' OPPOSITON TO FUMIGATION VIEWED

Last week, four of the most professed enemies of illegal crop spraying were
in Washington, where they presented documented proof of the damage that
according to them, crop spraying with glyphosate causes on people.

Up to now, much has been said but very little has been proven about health
and environmental risks of spraying, especially with glyphosate, an
herbicide widely used in legal agriculture.

Congressmen Rafael Orduz and Gustavo Petro, as well as Cauca Governor Floro
Tunubala and Narino Governor Parmenio Cuellar gave US experts a photo of a
girl with lesions on her body, which the politicians attribute to the
herbicide.

The photograph caused conflicting opinions in the halls of the US Congress
about the aerial crop spraying policy sponsored by that country, which is
part of the $1.3 billion approved for Plan Colombia.

Democratic Congressman John Conyers, of the House of Representative's
judicial committee said: "What we are doing to the Colombian people with
crop spraying is terrible; instead of helping, we are promoting the
internal conflict." The congressman promised to do whatever is necessary
in order that Americans can know how their taxpayer money is spent.

The Colombian delegation supported their case through studies that
concluded that the anti-narcotics policy was not efficient because after 10
years of spraying, the areas where crops are grown continue to
increase. "If there is eradication in one area, the growers move to other
areas and both planting and production continue," Senator Orduz stated.

In reality, the eradication policy is being seriously questioned. Based on
satellite photographs the government and the United Nations obtained
through contracts, Cambio recently reported that although 60,000 hectares
were sprayed in 2000, coca plant crops grew by 60 percent.

"We would have to question the whole basis of our aid to Colombia," US
Ambassador Anne Patterson stated.

Orduz, Petro, Tunubala and Cuellar never imagined that a Bogota judge would
give them partial triumph with a petition for protection that the
Organization of Native People of the Colombian Amazon presented on
Wednesday 18 July. The judge suspended crop spraying on indian
reservations in Cauca, Narino, Putumayo, Caqueta, Guainia and Guaviare,
because it threatened the environment and the inhabitants'right to life.

Yes, but no.

On Monday, 23 July, Gilberto Reyes Delgado, 15th Civil Circuit Court
justice, issued a preventative order for suspending glyphosate spraying
throughout the country, but the National Narcotics Directorate [Direccion
Nacional de Estupefacientes] made him realize that the protection petition
only referred to the indian reservations in six departments. Three days
later, on Thursday, 26 July, the judge changed his initial decision and
restricted the suspension order to the reservations of the six departments
that presented the protection petition.

Colombian and US Government circles were not pleased with the judge's
order. The Narino Palace in Bogota reacted immediately through the
National Narcotics Directorate, which fought the ruling because it thought
it lacked legal grounds and scientific evidence proving that the chemical
substances sprayed from airplanes have ill effects on
health. Nevertheless, the government obeyed the order and suspended
spraying in the areas the judge protected.

US State Department spokesperson Charles Hunter said that the chemicals
used for the destruction of illicit crops have not had ill effects on the
community in the 10 years they have been carrying out this operation in
Colombia. Hunter added that glyphosate, the main herbicide used throughout
the country, is "the least harmful on the world market," although he stated
that due to these reports the US Embassy in Bogota and the Environmental
Protection Agency were ordered to perform new toxicity tests.

In an interview with the newspaper El Tiempo, US Ambassador to Colombia
Anne Patterson warned about the negative consequences of suspending
spraying, since Plan Colombia has a key role in crop eradication. "The
United States approved funding Plan Colombia on these terms. If these
terms were to change, then we would have to question the whole basis of our
aid," the diplomat affirmed.

Andres Pastrana's government is between the devil and the deep blue
sea. Continuing with Plan Colombia largely depends on crop spraying
throughout the country, including Indian reservations. For the moment,
however, the anti-narcotics policy is in the hands of a Colombian
judge. The congressmen and governors who traveled to Washington found an
unexpected ally in a cold judicial office.

Refuting the judge's decision

Pearl necklace

According to experts who have thoroughly analyzed the issue, the decision
of 15th Court Judge Gilberto Reyes Delgado to suspend crop spraying on
indian reservations has several controversial points. Some of them are:

- - The decision was made without any debate on whether the herbicide
seriously affects the environment or human health, which requires profound
technical studies. The lawsuit was received Wednesday, 18 July and the
judge made the decision Monday, 23 July, after a three-day holiday
weekend. This means that the judge made the decision in just one working day.

- - The measure also has the questionable effect of benefiting inhabitants
located in reservation areas, who also grow illicit crops.

- - Glyphosate is widely used on legal crops. Therefore, saying that enough
evidence exists to prohibit its use as a preventative measure is at least
questionable. If it does not harm peasants who grow tomatoes, there is no
reason why it should harm coca plant growers.

- - The suspension judge Reyes ordered ends up turning a legal recourse into
a means to protect an illegal activity like growing coca and poppy crops.