A brief historical overview of bioethical activism in Croatia – as an impetus for the development of an educational model of bioethical activism

There has been a universal agreement in the last couple of decades that bioethics education at all levels should be provided to citizens through the adoption of the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights by the UNESCO General Conference in 1997 and by the United Nations General Assembly in 1998. The work of bioethical educators in moral and (bio)ethical values was applied to the issues raised by modern science and technology. The process of learning is also recognized as being the result of complex interacting influences. Teaching in a bioethical context must recognize these interconnections because of the internal application to and impact on peoples’ lives. Furthermore, teaching in a bioethical context needs to use pedagogies that engage students in participatory activities to enable the development of multiple dimensions of knowledge. These dimensions include the scientific content as well as the personal, social, and emotional aspects associated with any particular bioethical issue. Therefore, it is crucial to highlight the importance of focusing on the nature of the controversy, recognizing that opinions are based on particular worldviews and critical reflection of personal views, as well as promoting open-mindedness or willingness to accommodate new views and develop a new bioethical perspective on life. The paper presents several examples of bioethical activism in Croatia that provided an impetus for teaching students in bioethical activism at the Faculty of Education. I will mention an example of the inclusion of the NGO Pobjede in a bioethical course on the subject of the ethical relation to animals. An example of NGO Pobjede activity was a stimulating example of bioethical activism for students.


Introduction
If we examine the history of the origin of bioethics, then we can see that bioethics originated in the second half of the 20th century in the field of medicine with the emergence of new questions and problems to which ethics and medical ethics could not provide a satisfactory answer. In the first place, we refer to the well-known case from Seattle and the use of dialysis devices, and the establishment of the socalled "God Committee." 1 As bioethics has evolved as a new scientific discipline, the activities, areas, and problems that bioethics has tackled have expanded. With traditional scientific disciplines and fields, first and foremost medicine, bioethicists in their ranks now include philosophers, anthropologists, sociologists, historians, theologians, jurists, and more. Bioethics covers a growing range of topics, which is not surprising given that the central theme of bioethics is life and its preservation in all forms and stages. Given all this diversity, it is sometimes difficult to specify precisely what bioethicists do or should do, and there is certainly no correct answer to this question.
In analyzing bioethical activism as a modern educational model, I will briefly explore the rich history of bioethical activism in Croatia over the last twenty years. In the paper, three examples of bioethical activism will be described. The starting point of bioethical activism was certainly the Appeal for the Ethical

Appeal for the Ethical and Legal Regulation of the Application of Genetic Engineering in the Production and Distribution of Food
The history of bioethical activism in Croatia can also be called the history of the fight against GMOs since all three events described in the paper refer to the resistance to the GMOs' introduction in Croatia. Anti-GMO bioethical activism began with a bioethical symposium called the Challenges of Bioethics. The symposium Challenges of Bioethics was held from August 30 to September 2, 1998, organized by the Croatian Philosophical Society, as part of the permanent scientific and cultural manifestation of Dani Frane Petrić, which takes place every year in Cres, the birthplace of this famous Renaissance philosopher. At the symposium, a total of 28 papers were presented covering various bioethical topics. The papers from the symposium were published in 2000 in the Proceedings of the Challenge of Bioethics (ed.) Ante Čović, who writes in the introduction of the Proceedings: "in echoes of bioethical discussions extended media presence of this event, especially the case "Croatian Seven", which is after the presentation of the symposium soon broke out in public, and then by updating the problems of genetic engineering in human nutrition, about which the participants of the 7th Frane Petrić Days made a unique appeal." 2 The most important and critical document of the symposium, The Challenges of Bioethics, was the Appeal for Ethical and Legal Regulation of the Application of Genetic Engineering in Food Production and Distribution, adopted on the last day of the symposium on September 4, 1998, and addressed to the Government of the Republic of Croatia and the Croatian public. One of the leading bioethical activists, Ante Čović, describes the circumstances surrounding this Appeal in his paper: "the proposal for the Appeal was made in the debate after his presentation by Marijan Jošt, who will be profiled one of the key figures of the bioethical movement in Croatia just after his appearance at the Cres gathering. Marijan Jošt is an agronomist, professor at the College of Economics in Križevci and a renowned researcher in the field of plant genetics and breeding, and the author of several varieties of high-quality wheat".
The Appeal achieved unprecedented political success and was an impetus to bring to the public attention the problems of genetic modification technology in Croatia. Besides, all the demands made in the Appeal were translated into the Croatian Parliament's conclusion, as Čović writes: "all requests, which were made in the Appeal, were accepted by the House of Representatives of the Parliament, adopting them at the session on November 27, 1998. as its own conclusion. Namely, at the proposal of the HSS MPs Club, the contents of the Appeal were included, in an almost literal formulation, in conclusion, reached by the House of Representatives after the discussion on the state of agriculture in the Republic of Croatia. Among other obligations, the Government was tasked with setting up a bioethical commission, which was implemented by a Government decision on April 22, 1999. However, this has just begun the real plot in the Croatian bioethical story. Political parties, meanwhile, have shown considerable interest in the matter. Hence, a chronicler of bioethical developments, one year after the Appeal was adopted, concluded that genetic engineering had become a significant political issue." 3 The Appeal emphasizes that: "the advancement of science, in addition to the realized and promising effects in improving human life, also brings great dangers and risks, both for the future global survival of life and for vital national interests. Although we discussed a wide range of bioethical issues at the event, we would like to point out on this occasion, the problem of applying genetic engineering to the production and distribution of human food, which is especially true of foods modified by genetic methods (transgenic plants). We highlight this issue because there is a lack of appropriate ethical and legal regulation in this area." 4 The text above the Appeals shows the high civic awareness and responsibility of the signatories of the Appeals. They are aware of the potential danger to society and the environment from the unregulated introduction of genetically modified crops in Croatia. The bioethical activism of the signatories of Appeals is specified in the following text: "to establish a Bioethical Commission under the Government of the Republic of Croatia, composed of eminent representatives of science, ethicists (philosophers and theologians), and representatives of the public. Attention should be paid to the fact that the commission includes persons with a high degree of moral and scientific and professional responsibility, and not to include persons from those structures which are of interest and commercially involved in the production and marketing of genetically modified (GM) products; -to regulate this area, to provide for administrative control and to prohibit the importation of genetically modified food and agricultural products, or at least to introduce mandatory labelling that these products (or their constituent substances) are genetically modified, so that citizens or consumers can achieve the right to choose food. In particular, it is necessary to prohibit any sowing, even for experimental purposes, of such genetically modified plants." 5 Apart from its undeniable importance for the development of the bioethical situation in Croatia, the symposium Challenges of Bioethics with its Appeal is significant for articulating a critical attitude towards genetic modification technology that will become the central point of bioethical activism in Croatia in the coming years. As Čović points out: "it is characteristic of the Croatian bioethical situation that the key and crystallizing bioethical developments did not take place in the field of medicine and biomedical research but in the field of agronomy. It is also quite specific, almost exotic, that in the academic sphere, the Croatian Philosophical Society emerges as the primary institutional bearer of bioethical debate and articulation of theoretical positions and documents, based on which it has resisted the introduction of genetically modified plants into the diet and the environment." 6 This example shows the fundamental stance of bioethical activism in Croatia. Unlike the usual notions of activism, which boil down to street protests against someone or something, bioethical activism in Croatia is focused on one problem that is recognized as important in public, namely genetically modified crops. Besides, bioethical activism on this issue is multidimensional, primarily scientific, through the organization of scientific conferences, round tables, press releases, and politically through influencing political structures in the Republic of Croatia to take a firm stand against the introduction of genetically modified crops into Croatia.

The Lošinj Declaration on Biotic Sovereignty
After the successful adoption of the Appeal for Ethical and Legal Regulation of the Application of Genetic Engineering in the Production and Distribution of Food, bioethical activism in Croatia gained its institutional framework through the founding of the Croatian Bioethical Society in 2000. Lošinj Declaration on Biotic Sovereignty was created after the Round Table on GMOs and Biological Sovereignty held within the 3rd Lošinj Bioethics Days (from June 14 to 16,2004). The round table participants were: Ante Čović, Luka Tomašević, Ivan Cifrić, Marijan Jošt, Jagoda Munić, Jasenka Topić. The motive for making this Declaration was, first and foremost, the nonexistence of a GMO law in the Republic of Croatia, and justified fear that the lack of this law would endanger the biotic sovereignty of the Republic of Croatia. For these reasons, the participants of the Round Table decided to draw up the Lošinj Declaration on Biotic Sovereignty, which they unanimously supported and voted for, and called on all structures of society to preserve life and a healthy environment. The guarantee of this is precisely the prevention of the release of genetically modified organisms into the environment. 7 The Declaration consists of six paragraphs, and the first and second paragraphs are based on the concept of globalization and its effects on the area of living and culture. The third paragraph introduces the concept of biocultural sovereignty and rights. The fourth paragraph is aimed at expanding the powers of the political sovereignty of nature. Finally, the fifth paragraph introduces the concept of bioethical sovereignty to analyze the violations of biotic sovereignty on the example of Croatia in the last sixth paragraph.
The central notion of biotic sovereignty in the Declaration is as follows: "the notion of biotic sovereignty expresses autochthony as the supreme and inviolable principle of self-preservation of the living community. Because the man as a member of the 7 Tomašević, Luka (2004), Biotehnološki izazovi, Cetinska vrila, 23, 33-34. political community is also the only responsible member of the biotic community, the obligation to preserve biotic sovereignty is transferred to political power. However, political authority cannot acquire the power to change or disrupt the indigenous constitution of the living community. The autochthonism of the living community can be altered or disturbed by the reckless introduction of allochthonous organisms or by the conscious introduction of exotic organisms (GMOs), that is, the destruction of the natural environment. The introduction of exotic organisms is a direct and conscious denial of biotic sovereignty. Bioethical reasons also oppose this: a) the immensity of the consequences, b) irreversibility of effects, c) the possibility of catastrophic consequences." 8 The Lošinj Declaration on Biological Sovereignty is a novelty in looking at the environment and life as a whole and a unique document on a global scale. Until the advent of the Declaration, the environment was generally viewed in an instrumentalist manner following the prevailing techno-scientific paradigm. The Declaration introduces biotic sovereignty as a starting point in the debate on GMOs, from which the harmfulness or potential utility of genetic modification technology should be judged. The authors of the Declaration point out that if we grant sovereignty to the biotic community, and take into account the fact that humanity shares the planet Earth with many other species, we can adequately protect the environment and the lives of all beings.
The Declaration explicitly emphasizes that the Law on Nature Protection, adopted by the Croatian Parliament on September 25, 2003, which provides the limited use of GMOs and the introduction of GMOs into the environment, is a violation of political power in the sovereign rights of the biotic community and violation of bio-sovereignty. The Declaration has been published in various print media. It has aroused enviable public interest, especially since the announcement of the Declaration coincided with the grand affair of the illegal sowing of Pioneer's genetically modified maize. In the summer of 2004, there was inadvertent sowing of Pioneer hybrid corn seed PR34G12 contaminated with 0.5 percent of GMO MON 810 seed on a total of 1,790 hectares. After genetic contamination was discovered in the fields, all contaminated crops had to be destroyed. This affair cost taxpayers a total of HRK 12.88 million. 9 We can conclude that it was precisely on the example of this affair that the Declaration reaffirmed its validity and farsightedness.  Table, Ante Čović and Marijan Jošt, were the creators of the Lošinj Declaration on Biological Sovereignty, in which the Lošinj Statement has its foundation. The purpose of this statement, as the signatories noted, is to alert the public to the real dangers that threaten Croatia's biotic sovereignty. 10 This statement seeks to encourage resistance of citizens, non-governmental organizations, academia, and local selfgovernment and remind them of their commitment to the economic interest of Croatian society, which could be significantly endangered by the sowing of GMO crops in Croatia. The signatories of the Lošinj Statement emphasize: "a) based on the bioethical principles contained in the Lošinj Declaration on Biotic Sovereignty; b) having regard to the political views and requirements set out in the conclusions of the Committee on the Environment of the Croatian Parliament on July 3, 2008; c) taking into account existing legal solutions, the activities of the legal authorities, and current developments in this field in Croatia and the wider European environment, they made the joint statement in which they wanted to inform the Croatian public about the real dangers of endangering Croatia's biotic sovereignty by deliberately introducing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment. Encourage citizens, non-governmental organizations, academia, institutions, and primarily regional selfgovernment units to continue to systematically resist the transformation of Croatia into a GMO protectorate of multinational companies and imperial power centers; to warn the state bodies and institutions as well as the current authorities, on their moral, political and historical obligation to preserve Croatia's biotic sovereignty and defend the status of Croatia as a GMO-free country, which is not only a bioethical imperative but also a vital economic interest of Croatian society." 11

The Losinj Statement -for Croatia without GMOs
The crucial part of the Lošinj Statement consists of five paragraphs that seek to encourage the achievement of the stated goals. The first two paragraphs are related to the revision of the Republic of Croatia's legislation, where the legal acts will prevent the release of live GMOs into the environment and prohibit the sowing of genetically modified seeds, even for experimental purposes. The Statement cites, in particular, the conclusions of the Parliamentary Committee on the Environment, which require the Government of the Republic of Croatia to incorporate the following provisions into the envisaged amendments to the GMO law: a) prohibiting the release of living GM organisms into the environment, and b) prohibiting the planting of GM seeds even for experimental purposes.
Furthermore, the third and fourth paragraphs deal with how these requirements are implemented. The third paragraph of the Statement states the need for transparency in the work of the Council for Genetically Modified Organisms, established by the Government of the Republic of Croatia, which can only ensure the legality of the work of this body. Otherwise, this body not only acts unlawfully, but there is a justifiable fear that it is acting against the interests of the citizens of the country in which it was founded, about which Čović, as a member of the Council for Genetically Modified Organisms, has repeatedly spoken. The fourth paragraph states the need to maintain active resistance at the regional self-government level by declaring individual counties' areas GMO-free. Extra effort must be made to reach full coverage of the Croatian territory by proclaiming all GM Free Counties while raising this resistance internationally by including the Counties in the network of European GMO-Free Regions, which allows for an alliance and international support. The fifth, final paragraph of the Statement states the impossibility of any coexistence of conventional and organic agriculture with GM crops. Only the release of GMOs through the sowing of genetically modified crops into nature would lead to genetic pollution of the environment. Therefore, it is necessary to prohibit the coexistence of conventional and organic farming with GM crops. 12 The Lošinj statement -for Croatia without GMOs was presented at a press conference, which was organized on the occasion of World Environment Day, June 4, 2009.
The Lošinj statement itself and its presentation at a press conference did not go unnoticed by the US Embassy in Croatia. The US Embassy kept a close eye on all developments around GMOs in Croatia, as it says in diplomatic cable: "at a press conference on June 4, a University of Zagreb philosophy professor presented the conclusions of the annual Lošinj Days of Bioethics, including a warning that genetically modified organisms ( GMOs) could enter Croatia. He requested that Croatian laws be changed to forbid the planting of genetically modified seeds even for experimental purposes; to require labeling of products with any GMO content, regardless how small; and to include a precautionary principle by which the use of GMOs could be prevented based on a measure of harmfulness. The professor also alleged that the Government's Advisory Council on GMO "works in secrecy." Interestingly, however, he noted that of the 17 council's members, only he and another member are critical of GMOs." 13 Although the diplomatic cable does not 12 Ibid, 270-271. 13 Wikileaks, Gmo in Croatia: Slow Acceptance by Scientists, Continued Fear Among Public, http://cablegatesearch. net/cable.php?id=09ZAGREB353 (accessed: September 01, 2020). state who it is, it is clear that the unnamed professor of philosophy is Ante Čović. From this diplomatic cable, it is clear that the US Embassy is paying close attention to prominent biotechnology critics. It is interesting to note that some of the creators of the Lošinj Statement, Ante Čović, Valerie Vrček, and Marjan Jošt, participated in the press conferences. Still, only Čović's statements are mentioned, which indicates that the US Embassy sees Ante Čović as a key bioethical activist against GMOs. The diplomatic cable ends with a comment stating: "the philosophy professor's comments to the press typify the situation in Croatia regarding GMOs. Public fear of GMOs is prevalent and encouraged, with little regard for fact-checking or scientific basis. It is particularly unfortunate that the rhetoric this time came from a member of the Government's Council on GMOs. His criticisms seem to ignore the fact that Croatian law is already highly restrictive of GMOs, and may serve only to continue to stoke public fears on the issue." 14 These are three examples from the history of bioethical activism, which took place primarily in the context of the fight against GMOs in Croatia. There is a rich tradition of bioethical activism, which is the inspiration for encouraging students at the Faculty of Education in Osijek, as we will see below.

Case study -education on bioethical activism at the Faculty of Education in Osijek
An elective course in bioethics was introduced in the academic year 2018/19 at the Faculty of Education. One of the aims of the bioethics course was to encourage students to engage in the community through a positive example of NGO Pobjede activity. The NGO was founded in 2007 and, since 2009, has been running an asylum for abandoned dogs in Osijek. Objectives and activities of NGOs: Protection of abandoned animals, and promoting animal rights through non-specific forms of thought. Day-to-day care of dogs in the asylum, raising awareness and developing sensibilities regarding animal protection and rights, and active participation in society. Education on animals' protection and rights to encourage the development of compassion, solidarity, and active participation in society. Promotion of veganism as a sustainable lifestyle. The promotion of volunteering, cooperation with local, state, international institutions and educational, pedagogical, and other public institutions. 15 For all these goals and activities, the NGO was an ideal partner for the bioethics course. The cooperation was primarily achieved through one teaching unit on speciesism and the ethical treatment of animals. Lectures from the bioethics 14 Ibid. 15 Pobjede, About Us, https://www.pobjede.hr/index.php/2013-12-18-15-19-43/o-nama (accessed: September 01, 2020. course were held in the summer semester of the 2018/19 academic year and were attended by 17 students. The first guest appearance of the representative of the NGO Pobjede, Hrvoje Harač, was held on May 15 as part of a lecture on speciesism. After I introduced the topic of speciesism, Hrvoje Harač introduced students to the issue of speciesism through their experience of working in an asylum for abandoned animals. He also pointed out that one of the specifics of NGO Pobjede is that all members are vegan. After that, Hrvoje Harač explained the concept of carnism, which is described in the book Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows: An Introduction to Carnism by Melanie Joy. The lecture left a significant impact on the students, as they had many questions about veganism, speciesism, carnism, and especially about their care for abandoned animals in the asylum. It was agreed with Hrvoje Harač that students would come to visit the asylum as part of their bioethics classes. Students visited the asylum on May 28. The visit to the asylum consisted of three parts. Upon arrival and meeting with the asylum staff, all students took the asylum dogs for a walk. After returning from the dog walk, a vegan lunch was organized for all students. Finally, after lunch, the asylum staff gave a lecture on the ethical treatment of animals and veganism. Students had many questions and at the end of the visit, most of them wanted to take the dogs for a walk once again. At the next lecture, I spoke with the students and did a small survey on visiting asylum and the topics we discussed there. It turns out that none of the students are vegan or vegetarian and that only 2 students out of 17 visited an asylum before. At the same time, the students pointed out that they now, after visiting the asylum, realized the importance of the ethical treatment of animals. When I asked them if they thought that this visit to the asylum had prompted them for possible social engagement and activism, the vast majority of students responded positively. In the annual students' survey of the Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, students expressed great satisfaction with the course in bioethics by giving an average grade of 4.97. This is my best-rated course of all that I teach at the University, and also an incentive and a great responsibility towards future students who will attend a bioethics course.

Conclusion
Bioethics as innovative science, can not and must not remain closed in academic circles, particularly bearing in mind that it appeared as an attempt to respond to existential threats facing humanity. Croatian bioethicists were aware of this, as can be seen from three examples of bioethical activism in Croatia. These examples are addressed in the paper because they focus on the current problem of introducing genetically modified crops into fields and the food chain in Croatia. Bioethical activism as an educational model has great potential, as my experience in the course of bioethics has shown. The students were very excited to see in practice how to act concretely. This experience gives an incentive to use other forms of bioethical activism in the future and explains and presents them to students within bioethics courses.