>That is the whole point. In the quest to oppose GMO you manage to convince a Judge that honey had no pollen in it, and that the pollen came-in in the
extraction process.
Not a judge, The Court of Justice has one judge per EU country and the Court is helped by eight ‘advocates-general’ whose job is to present opinions on the cases brought before the Court. They must do so publicly and impartially.

>Reading the justification of the 2011 ruling, "most of the pollen is added when honey is extracted"   I ask myself several questions. At what point of my extracting process should I be adding the pollen?”

 If ones reads all of the 2011 ruling one reads, “Pollens are solid particles actually derived from honey collection, partly due to bees but mainly due to the centrifugation carried out by the beekeeper.” 

So, there is no need to worry, you are doing it already.

> Your list of organisations is not representative of European beekeepers from the 28 member states.   

Gavin, the list was provided by Juanse. It's not mine.  
As I understand it these are the principal organisations in each of the EU countries. I Don't know them personally with the exception of UNAF which is unquestionably representative of French beekeepers. With 22000 members it has never received financial aid from the pesticide lobbies, unlike the BBKA.

Bil, France

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html