You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

June 11, 2024

Genome Editing in Thai and Indonesian Agricultural Biotechnology

Subscribe to Updates

Advances in biotechnology have enabled the development of a range of new agricultural tools. From DNA sequencing to plant tissue culture and gene editing, these advances are facilitating the development of better crops.

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are one well-known example of agricultural biotechnology. GMOs are organisms whose genetic material has been artificially altered by inserting a piece of foreign DNA. This DNA may be synthetic in origin or sourced from other organisms.

Genome editing (also called gene editing or GEd) involves making precise changes to an organism’s genome without the integration of foreign DNA elements. Several approaches to genome editing have been developed. A well-known one is called CRISPR-Cas9, in which scientists make precise “cuts” in the DNA to create a new genetic variation. Unlike with GMOs, this introduces only minor modifications that are indistinguishable from natural mutations, typically by transplanting genes that code desirable traits from one species into another.

GEd technology has been recognized and supported by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Thirteen FAO-member countries who are also members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) announced their support of the use of GEd technology for commercial uses and consumption at a recent WTO meeting. In addition, over 40 countries around the world, such as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, England, Japan, Kenya, the Philippines, Russia, the UK, and the US, have published policies emphasizing that foods free of transgenes (i.e., foods that do not contain genes transferred from external sources) are not GMOs, concluding that GEd plants are as safe as normal plants.

In February 2024, the European Parliament approved new genomic techniques (NGTs), or GEd. As a result, plants that are produced using GEd technology are not classified by the EU as GMOs, and the EU authorities consider them to be the same as conventional plants.

Thailand’s Stance toward GEd

In Thailand, the Department of Agriculture in the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC) views the results of the EU vote as providing timely support for Thailand’s own policy consideration of the issue. The European Parliament has agreed that genome editing technology is highly safe for human health and the environment, and its use can potentially reduce costs and increase the quality and productivity of agriculture. With this development, it is an opportune time for Thailand to accelerate the process of adopting GEd technology in the agricultural sector for food safety and security by drafting guidelines for the application of GEd technology.

Since the beginning of 2024, the MOAC has taken several actions targeting the development of GEd knowledge.

One event the Department of Agriculture organized was a seminar titled “Modern Biotechnology to Solve the Global Crisis and Emerging Pests.” This event was a brainstorming seminar for all stakeholders on how to take advantage of technology that is safe and on par with other countries, as well as creating guidelines for operating and driving GEd technology in Thailand, including communicating with the public and consumers for a better understanding of the safety of GEd technology and its difference from the production of GMOs. The seminar emphasized that Thailand must be able to take advantage of GEd technology in its future planning for addressing global crises and emerging pests that will impact its agricultural sector.

The Department of Agriculture also organized an academic seminar on GEd technology to set a clear national stance on the issue and accelerate communication with the public and consumers that plants produced with GEd technology are different from GMOs. Next, the Department of Agriculture will invite experts from the FAO, from various countries such as Australia, Japan, and the United States, and from the private and public sectors to join together in a push to build confidence in GEd technology and speed up the preparation of operational procedures. Doing so will assist Thailand in leveraging genome editing technology for the agricultural sector for food safety and security through modern biotechnology. The experts mentioned above recognize that NGTs, or GEd, are likely to continue playing an important role in the increasingly dire situations of global warming and global food crises.

Most professionals believe that using GEd technology to modify the genetics of groups of plants that can be naturally hybridized can produce high-yielding plant varieties that are resistant to disease and drought. In addition, they believe that GEd technology will increase nutritional value. Most countries in the world have invested in research into GEd and approved the use of GEd technology, accepting GEd technology for both commercial and consumption purposes, as with conventional crops, to increase national food security.

Early Support for GEd in Thailand

Though the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives in Thailand has not yet issued any draft notifications or announced public hearings regarding the use of GEd, there is progress in the public sector. One project showing that Thailand is ready to support the use of GEd technology was launched when the National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (BIOTEC) released a publication looking at the issue of genome editing and providing technical criteria for considering organisms developed with GEd technology.

Under the guidelines, genome-edited plants derived from the use of GEd techniques employing site-directed nucleases (SDNs) are generally classified into three categories:

  • SDN-1 (deletion), site-directed mutagenesis without using a DNA sequence template.;
  • SDN-2 (substitution), site-directed mutagenesis using a DNA sequence template.; and
  • SDN-3 (insertion), site-directed insertion of a gene/large DNA sequence using a DNA sequence template.

The guidelines have not set out criteria for considering organisms developed with genome-editing technology that do not qualify as living beings genetically modified.

In the view of BIOTEC, SDN-1 plants are not considered to be GMOs, while SDN-2 and SDN-3 plants may be considered as such. If a party wishes to use GEd in conjunction with food, a safety assessment by BIOTEC will be required. The required safety assessment for SDN-1 is lower than for SDN-2 and SDN-3.

This is a positive sign showing that Thailand is ready to move forward with GEd technology development. We may see wider discussions, acceptance, and regulations regarding GEd technology in the future.

Indonesia’s Stance toward GEd

In recent discussions on GEd technology, Indonesian authorities agreed that the determination of whether or not genome-edited products are considered genetically modified will be based on the mechanism of genetic repair, in accordance with the definitions set forth in the Cartagena Protocol and Government Regulation No. 21 of 2005 regarding Biosafety of Genetically Modified Products. If the repair mechanism is carried out by involving donors or genes that do not have a taxonomic relationship with the organism that is the subject of the GEd, the genome-edited product is considered genetically modified. However, if it does not involve a donor or genes outside the individual, it can be considered non-genetically modified.

Despite the discussions surrounding genome editing, there are not yet any specific regulations on genome editing in Indonesia. Therefore, based on Government Regulation No. 21 of 2005 regarding Biosafety of Genetically Modified Products, GEd is still considered genetic modification, and genome-edited products must undergo a safety assessment in order to obtain approval from the Biosafety Commission.

The safety assessment procedure for genetically modified food products is overseen by Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control, or BPOM, and involves the following steps:

  • Application submission. Applications are submitted through BPOM’s e-filing system. Applicants must also submit supporting documents in accordance with the relevant BPOM regulations regarding genetically modified food products, accompanied by an integrity pact.
  • Data verification process. If the application is not complete, the applicant must supply the required materials within 14 days of receiving notification from the head of BPOM.
  • Biosafety commission assignment. The head of BPOM assigns the Biosafety Commission to conduct a food safety assessment. The Biosafety Commission has the task of providing recommendations to the authorized minister and the head of the authorized non-ministerial government institution (LPNK) in formulating and establishing policies and issuing biosafety certificates for genetically modified products.
  • Assessment by Biosafety Commission. The Biosafety Commission conducts the food safety assessment within 14 days.
  • Assessment by Biosafety Technical Team. The Biosafety Commission may assign the Biosafety Technical Team, which assists the Biosafety Commission in conducting evaluations and technical assessments of biosafety, to conduct a technical document review and perform further testing if necessary. This will be completed within 56 days of receiving the assignment letter from the Biosafety Commission.
  • Technical assessment results. The Biosafety Technical Team submits the results of the technical assessment to the Biosafety Commission within 7 days.
  • Assessment submission to Biosafety Clearing House. The Biosafety Commission submits the technical assessment of the Biosafety Technical Team to the Biosafety Clearing House, a Biosafety Commission tool that serves as a means of communication between the Biosafety Commission and stakeholders, within 15 days.
  • Publication by Biosafety Clearing House. The Biosafety Clearing House publishes a summary of the Biosafety Technical Team’s technical assessment for 60 days to allow the public to comment.
  • Report submission to Biosafety Commission. The Biosafety Clearing House then submits a public response report to the Biosafety Commission.
  • Biosafety Commission recommendation. The Biosafety Commission submits a food safety recommendation to the head of BPOM within 14 days. In submitting recommendations on food safety of Genetically Modified Products to the Head BPOM, taking into account the results of the assessment of the Biosafety Commission Technical Team and input from the public.
  • Issuance of approval by Head of BPOM. The head of BPOM issues a safety certificate and permit for the distribution of the genetically modified food.

Conclusion

As the regulatory landscapes continue to evolve around genome editing technologies in Thailand, Indonesia, and across the globe, businesses operating in the agricultural biotechnology sector must stay vigilant. Navigating the emerging regulations and approval processes will be crucial for companies looking to commercialize new genome-edited crops and food products. Companies must also carefully manage public perception around genome editing, clearly communicating the science and safety assessments behind these innovations. With strategic foresight and regulatory attentiveness, the agricultural biotech industry can capitalize on the promise of genome editing to enhance food security and drive sustainable productivity gains. Businesses primed to leverage genome editing technologies while mitigating regulatory risks will be positioned for leadership in this new age of agricultural biotechnology.

Related Professionals

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Regulatory Affairs

Locations

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 15, 2023
In May 2023, Thailand issued a regulation on conditional approval for emergency use of medicinal products, replacing a series of similar notifications that had been issued to aid mitigation efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, regulatory authorities worldwide—including the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—reshaped the approval pathway for emergency drugs intended for the treatment of COVID-19. The Thai FDA published five Notifications Re: Conditional Approval for the Emergency Use of Medicinal Products to outline the registration requirements and channels of distribution for drugs intended for the diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of COVID-19. As the threat from COVID-19 was receding, the Thai FDA saw fit to prepare for the potential emergence of other serious communicable diseases by enabling the supply of timely medications for disease diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. The Thai FDA therefore cancelled the five COVID-19-related emergency use notifications, which were published in 2020 and 2022, and replaced them with the Notification Re: Conditional Approval for Emergency Use of Medicinal Products published in May 2023. Under the May 2023 FDA notification on emergency use, conditional approval can be applied to drugs supported by empirical scientific evidence demonstrating their capacity to diagnose, treat, alleviate, cure, or prevent a serious communicable disease. The drugs eligible for approval under this new emergency pathway include novel drugs that are not yet approved in Thailand, as well as existing drugs approved in Thailand but recently discovered to have additional potential indications for the diagnosis, treatment, alleviation, cure, or prevention of a serious communicable disease. Distribution The 2023 FDA notification also clearly defines permissible distribution channels based on the dosage form of drug products: Vaccines can be distributed to governmental organizations that have a duty to prevent or treat diseases, such as the Thai Red Cross Society (TRCS), the Government Pharmaceutical Organization
Read More
September 7, 2023
Thailand is a member state of the ASEAN Economic Community, and next year, it is expected that the ASEAN Harmonization of Traditional Medicines and Health Supplements will be signed by the economic minister of each ASEAN country. Following ratification, the ASEAN Guidelines on Claims and Claims Substantiation for Traditional Medicines and Health Supplements will become the standard guidelines in the region, and various implementation efforts and instruments will follow. These guidelines cover a wide range of medicines and supplements; however, it is not possible to cover all herbal products. There are three types of health supplement claims: nutritional claims, functional claims, and disease risk reduction claims. Examples of the three types of claims include the following: Nutritional claims: supplements nutrition, nourishes the body, supports healthy growth and development, etc. Functional claims: maintains healthy joints, supports immunity, maintains liver function, etc. Disease risk reduction claims: helps to reduce risk of dyslipidemia, helps to reduce risk of osteoporosis, etc. The degree of evidence required for substantiating disease risk reduction claims is higher than for functional claims and nutritional claims. Functional claims and disease risk reduction claims must be substantiated by efficacy studies and the relevant toxicity data. It is the responsibility of the health supplement company to provide the required evidence in order to comply with the criteria for making such claims. Tips on Health Claims for Health Supplements 1. Nutritional Claims For essential nutrients such as vitamins and minerals, as listed by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the amount included in a supplement must be between 15% and 100% of the Thai Recommended Daily Intake (RDI) values. Rules for specific kinds of nutritional claims are provided in the Notification of the Thai FDA RE: Nutrient Function Claims. For example, the nutrients that can be claimed as boosting the
Read More
August 29, 2023
Laos’ Ministry of Health (MOH) has promulgated a regulation detailing registration and notification protocols for medical devices. Decision on the Registration and Notification of Medical Devices No. 1470/MOH will come into force 60 days after both the signing of the regulation (which already occurred in July) and publication in the Official Gazette, which has not yet been specified by the government. Registration of medical devices in Laos is mentioned in the country’s Law on Drugs and Medical Products No. 07/NA, dated December 21, 2011, but a registration procedure has not been put in place. There was only a separate requirement to furnish certain required documents when importing medical devices. Now, the decision outlines the registration and notification process for medical devices through the Ministry of Health’s Food and Drug Department (FDD), in line with the regulatory principles in the ASEAN Medical Device Directive of 2015, which Laos has ratified. Medical Devices in Laos The decision defines medical devices as any instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, appliance, implant, in vitro reagent or calibrator, software, material, or other similar or related article intended for any of the following uses in humans: Diagnosis, prevention, monitoring, recovery from, or alleviation or treatment of a disease; Diagnosis, monitoring, recovery from, or alleviation of or compensation for an injury; Replacement, modification, or support of anatomy or a physiological process; Supporting and sustaining life; Controlling or assisting in conception; or Disinfection and sterilization of tools and medical devices. Medical devices in Laos are given one of four classifications based on their level of risk: Class A – Low risk (e.g., rubber belts, cotton for medical purposes, nonwoven swabs, adhesive bandages) Class B – Low-moderate risk (e.g., neonatal suction equipment, surgical gloves, gastro-catheters) Class C – Moderate-high risk (e.g., endoscopic surgical equipment, anesthesia equipment, peritoneal dialysis equipment) Class
Read More
August 29, 2023
Since the June 9, 2022, delisting of all parts of the cannabis plant according to the Narcotics Code, there has been an explosion of cannabis dispensaries operating in Thailand. The Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine (DTTAM) has issued more than 12,000 cannabis dispensary licenses to businesses in Thailand. A license allows a dispensary to sell cannabis flowers legally. In addition, the DTTAM requests the cooperation of dispensaries in submitting monthly reports about the sourcing, selling, and inventory of cannabis flowers. The DTTAM may suspend the selling license of dispensaries that fail to submit these reports. Apart from the enforcement duties and administrative acts of the DTTAM, the enactment of the laws and regulations pertaining to cannabis seemed to be drastically winding down. One of the reasons was that Thailand had delays in the process of forming a new government following the general election of May 14, 2023. These delays dampened Thailand’s thriving cannabis industry. In particular, the industry has concerns about the uncertainty of the nascent cannabis law. On August 11, 2023, the Narcotics Control Division of the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted the Draft Regulation Re: Application for Approval and Approval for Manufacture, Importation, Exportation, Distribution or Possession of Narcotics under Category 5 (Extracts from Cannabis or Hemp Plants Only). This may be the first regulation that the newly formed government implements with regard to cannabis extracts. Unlike the DTTAM’s enforcement activities, the Thai FDA requests that a domestic manufacturer, importer, exporter, or seller of cannabis extracts apply for a license. The Thai FDA, as the authority, will consider granting a license only in the following cases: For medical benefits; For commercial or industrial benefits; For the benefit of medical or scientific analysis or research; and For use by the government for preventing and
Read More