In the EU legal system, there is a large difference between the proceduresand requirements for the introduction of crops that are classified as gen-etically modified (GM) and crops not so classified. In order to investigatewhether this regulatory divide is compatible with real risks two cases ofGM crops and two cases of non-GM crops are scrutinized. It is concludedthat the regulatory divide cannot be justified from the viewpoint of riskassessment, since the GM/non-GM dichotomy is not an accurate indicatorof either health risk or environmental risk. Much better such indicatorsare available and should form the basis of a legislation aimed at prevent-ing the introduction of crops that are harmful for human health or theenvironment. If the legislator has other reasons to regulate GM crops dif-ferently than conventional crops, then those reasons should be stated inthe legislation and determine the types of measures that it prescribe