|
|
|
| Gene Campaign’s Legal Actions on GMOS |
|
|
Gene
Campaign had organized a national conference on the ‘Relevance of GM
Technology to Indian Agriculture and Food Security in 2003. Participants
at this conference included the full range of stakeholders from industry,
research and academia, civil society, farmers, political leaders, students
and concerned citizens. Twenty consensus recommendations were made by this
group and sent to the Department of Biotechnology (DBT). DBT rebutted each
one of them and refused to even discuss them.
After
this, Gene Campaign decided to file a Public Interest Litigation in the
Supreme Court , asking for improvements in the regulatory system for GMOs.
Below is
a chronology of events in the ongoing 2004 PIL along with Interim
Applications, as well as a fresh PIL filed in 2007 to block the
deregulation of GM food imports.
Some key
recommendations made by experts and stakeholders for better GM regulation
and DBT’s rebuttals are also given.
Gene
Campaign had organized a national conference on the ‘Relevance of GM
Technology to Indian Agriculture and Food Security in 2003. Participants
at this conference included the full range of stakeholders from industry,
research and academia, civil society, farmers, political leaders, students
and concerned citizens. Twenty consensus recommendations were made by this
group and sent to the Department of Biotechnology (DBT). DBT rebutted each
one of them and refused to even discuss them.
Some key recommendations and DBT’s response
|
Recommendations from
National Conference on GMOs |
Response from
Government of India (DBT) |
|
A comprehensive
biotechnology policy should be developed in consultation with all
stakeholders.
|
It is not felt necessary
that a separate National biotech policy should be developed
|
|
A statutory National
Bioethics Commission must be set up.
There should be a
consultative and participatory process to prioritise crops and traits
for genetic improvement through biotechnology with the goal of
addressing the needs of small farmers and Indian agriculture.
|
Setting up of a
Statutory National Bioethics Commission is not felt necessary.
The Ministry of
Agriculture has already set up a task Force to look into the issues.
|
|
India must develop a
policy for transgenic varieties of crops for which it is a Centre of
Origin and Diversity.
|
The issue of “Policy for
transgenic varieties of crops” especially the rice has already been
taken care in the agri-biotech research.
|
|
A cost and risk benefit
analysis must be conducted before deciding on a GM product.
Develop a stringent
protocol to assess environmental and ecological impact.
|
The cost and risk
benefit analysis is the basic fundamental of seed business and there
should not be any apprehension with such GM crops.
The Protocol to assess
environmental and ecological impact for risk assessment and risk
management are already inbuilt in the EPA and they are not less
stringent than anywhere in the world.
|
|
Have a policy to deal
with bio terrorism urgently.
A new statutory,
independent National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority must be
established.
|
The policy to deal with
bio-terrorism is not a grave issue at present in our country.
A New Independent
National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority would not be solution to
various issues faced by the industry.
|
|
Make GEAC more
competent, transparent and accountable.
Post data on research
and development of GM crops and products on websites and local
newspapers.
|
GEAC is comprised of all
stakeholders pertaining to various administrative ministries and is
thus competent.
Posting of data on R&D
on GM crops and products on website is not a practical suggestion.
|
|
An annual review of all
decisions on GM products must be presented to Parliament
|
Submission of GEAC
decisions to Parliament is not a practical exercise
|
|
There should be a
moratorium on commercial cultivation of GM crops until the
regulatory system is demonstrably improved. Research on GM crops,
however, should continue.
|
There is no need for a
moratorium on commercial cultivation of GM crops as research in this
field aims at benefit to the farmers at large with benefit to the
society.
The regulatory
procedures that exist today are good enough to meet the biosafety
requirements.
|

After DBT’s refusal to
engage with the concerns expressed by experts and civil society alike,
Gene Campaign decided to file a Public Interest Litigation in the Supreme
Court, asking for improvements in the regulatory system that governs GMOs
The Writ Petitions and Interim Applications filed by
Gene Campaign against the Government are listed below:
Gene Campaign vs. Union
of India |
|
I
. Writ Petition (WP) in Supreme Court asking for a Biotech Policy and a
better GM Regulatory Regime - Jan-2004
 |
|
Prayer
-
Direct the respondents to bring the Rules for Manufacture, Use, Import,
Export and Storage of Hazardous Micro-organisms, Genetically Engineered
Organisms or Cells, 1989 in consonance with Art. 14, 19, 21, 38, 48, 48A
read with 51-A(g) of the Constitution and in the eventuality of the
respondents failing to do so, declare the Rules of 1989 as
unconstitutional;
-
Direct the Respondents to set-up a High Power Committee to formulate a
National Policy on Genetically Engineered Organisms (GEOs) through a
multi-stakeholder consultation process;
-
Direct the Respondents to observe a moratorium on various
permissions/approvals/trials concerning GEOs, in particular of
commercial nature, particularly of crops for which India is a Centre of
Origin/Diversity, till the Rules are amended and a sound Regulatory and
Monitoring System is put in place;

|
|
ONGOING…. |
|
 |
|
II. WP-2004 -
Interim Application for release of Allergenicity and Toxicity data of
Bt brinjal – October2006
 |
|
Prayer
-
Direct the concerned authorities to make public all data that is
relevant to determining environment and health safety , including
toxicity and allergenicity data of a genetically engineered variety
under trial.
-
Direct a moratorium on commercialization of GE varieties until a
competent regulatory structure and rules are put in place since there is
ample evidence of mismanagement and mishandling of field trials by the
regulatory agencies .

|
|
ORDERS PASSED- Direction given to release allergenicity and
toxicity data |
|
III. WP 2007 - To stop the deregulation of import of
GM Foods – October 2007
 |
|
Prayer
-
To
strike down the Notification dated 23rd August, 2007 issued by the
Ministry of Environment & Forests and published in the Gazette of India
Extraordinary, Part II –Sec.3 (ii), S.O. No. 1519(E), New Delhi on the
11th September, 2007 as unconstitutional, being violative of
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution;
-
Declare that the provisions of Rule 20 of the said Rules of 1989 are
unguided, uncanalised, likely to be abused and violative of Article 14
of the Constitution;

|
|
Govt Acted After Notice, to Hold Notification in
Abeyance till 30.9.09 |
|
GM PIL- Interim
Application on Bt rice contamination in Jharkhand- Sept2008
 |
|
Prayer
-
Direct GEAC to revoke all the approvals granted to Maharasthra Hybrid
Seeds Company Limited (MAHYCO).
-
Grant moratorium on all the approvals/public trials till a proper
regulatory regime ensuring safety to nature, environment and public
health is brought into force by the Government;
-
Direct a review of all the approvals/permissions granted by the Genetic
Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) as they have been granted without
any statutory guidelines, scientific assessment of bio-safety etc, and,
therefore, are arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and
21 of the Constitution;

|
|
ONGOING…. |
 |
|