Germany's brief ban on the sale of MON810 seed in 2007 over an unsufficient monitoring plan, and the current ban on sale and cultivation has lead to some quite interesting official papers.
The notification from 2007 details a number of issues that should be considered in a monitoring plan, and the new notification from 2009 gives several pages of what the German authorities consider as new scientific evidence that makes it necessary to act according to the Precautionary Principle and evoke the German and EU saufguard clauses.
The paper refers to Bt expostion, ecotoxicological effects on moths and butterflies (lepidoptera), beetles (coleoptera), soil and water organisms, the specific issues of endangered species or species in nature protection areas. The BVL, the competent authority also had to conclude that the cultivation of MON810 was so "marginal" in Germany (on an expected acreage of 2700 ha), that the ban would not be financial problem for Monsanto.
A stark contrast to this paper however is Monsanto's monitoring report for the growing season 2008. It's not only a far cry from the detailed list of issues that the BVL was forced to consider relevant in May 2007, it doesn't even give information of whether any of the data taken from other environmental monitoring projects had any geographical relation to the MON810 fields.

A number of Civil Society Organizations are currently in Paris at the 7th Meeting of the Working Group on Access and Benefit Sharing, to "witness the negotiations and to name - and if necessary to shame - governments who continue to obstruct the negotiations and violate their responsibilities under the CBD. "
As they state in their Call: "Half a generation of postponing the implementation of one of the three objectives of the CBD has served the spread of organized biopiracy. There is no excuse for further delays. The negotiations now are neither about gap analysis, nor about studies, but about political will and countries’ positions."
They have also written up some very useful background papers on Scope and definitions as a key issue for the fate of fair and equitable benefit-sharing and on Suggestions to ensure the enforcement of provider rights.