Skip to main content

GoI's 'irresponsible, unscientific' policy on GM mustard seeks to criminalise farmers

Counterview Desk 

The Coalition for a GM-Free India has asked the Government of India (GoI) to show how it will prevent farmers from using herbicides on HT mustard crop that received approval in October 2022. In a letter sent to Bhupendar Yadav. Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change, it said, the GoI has no statutory powers to regulate farmers in their use of herbicides either under Insecticides Act or Environment Protection Act (EPA).
The letter, signed by Kavitha Kuruganti, said, the GoI has been “disingenuously arguing that Delhi University’s GM mustard which has used the bar-barnase-barstar technology in the name of pollination control, is not herbicide tolerant. It has also said, including in Supreme Court affidavits and the regulators’ approval letter to the crop developer, that farmers will be penalised under the Insecticides Act 1968 and EPA if they use herbicide on GM mustard crop.”
It quoted the regulators’ approval letter as stating, “Usage of any formulation of herbicide is not permitted for cultivation in the farmer’s field under any situation… Any such use in the farmer’s field without due approval from CIB&RC would attract appropriate legal action under Central Insecticides Act 1968 and Environment Protection Act 1986”, underlining, “This essentially means that the GoI is “ready to criminalise ordinary distress-stricken farmers of the country with jail terms after taking an irresponsible and unscientific policy decision.”
The Coalition underlined, “The very inclusion of a condition about usage of herbicide in farmers’ fields is an admission that the GM mustard crop is indeed herbicide tolerant, including in the hybrid version meant for cultivation by farmers.”

Text:

On October 25th 2022, Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) wrote an approval letter for the environmental release of GM HT Mustard to the applicant CGMCP in Delhi University. Based on the untenable conditions placed in the approval letter and the specious argument that GM mustard is a herbicide tolerant crop only in the seed production stage and not thereafter, the Union of India is misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India with an assurance that GM mustard is not an HT crop. By repeatedly giving this assurance that GM mustard is not a herbicide tolerant crop (on irresponsible reasoning that the crop applicant did not apply for its environmental release as an HT crop and does not intend to commercially exploit that trait!), the Government of India is trying to circumvent the clear recommendation by the Court-appointed TEC for a ban on HT crops in India (similar recommendations were given by other credible committees too). The Government is, clearly, trying to prevent the SC from adjudicating on GM mustard on the basis of the TEC report, both because it knows that GM mustard is indeed an HT crop and because the Government is also aware of the many adverse impacts of HT crops.
Government should stop its efforts to criminalise farmers: Against this backdrop, the Government of India is latching on to a particular condition in the GM mustard environmental release approval letter issued in October 2022, to present an assurance to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and concerned citizens that farmers will not be allowed to use GM mustard as an HT crop. The very fact that Condition Number VII appears on Page 2 of the approval letter is an admission that GM mustard indeed is an HT crop with the distinct possibility of farmers using the corresponding herbicide Glufosinate on the crop.
Instead of avoiding the approval of such a hazardous crop, the Government of India is seeking the easy option of criminalisation of farmers by putting in such a condition. Meanwhile, this letter is to highlight the fact that such criminalisation or penalising of farmers is legally not possible!
In the additional affidavit filed in the SC on 09.11.2022 by the Union of India, it was stated that “the use of herbicide by farmers is not permitted in the fields for cultivation of GM mustard crop in accordance with the recommendation made by the GEAC…This is clearly enshrined in conditions VI and VII of the permit letter issued by the Government of India on 25.10.2022. Any such use in the farmer’s field without due approval from CIB&RC would attract appropriate legal action under Central Insecticides Act 1968 and Rules 1971, Environment Protection Act 1986 and Rules made thereunder”.
The permission letter dated 25/10/2022 stated VII. Usage of any formulation of herbicide is not permitted for cultivation in the farmer’s filed under any situation and such use would require the necessary permission as per the procedures and protocols of safety assessment of insecticides/herbicides by CIB&RC would attract appropriate legal action under Central Insecticides Act 1968 and Rules 1971, EP Act 1986 and Rules made thereunder.”
It is highly misleading for GoI to assure the Court that regulators will prevent farmers from using herbicide on HT GM mustard crop
Insecticides Act 1968 EXEMPTS farmers from the purview of regulation: However, under Section 38 of the Insecticides Act 1968, farmers are exempted from the purview of statutory regulation.
“38. Exemption.—(1) Nothing in this Act shall apply to— (a) the use of any insecticide by any person for his own household purposes or for kitchen garden or in respect of any land under his cultivation; (b) any substance specified or included in the Schedule or any preparation containing any one or more such substances, if such substance or preparation is intended for purposes other than preventing, destroying, repelling or mitigating any insects, rodents, fungi, weeds and other forms of plant or animal life not useful to human beings. (2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, and subject to such conditions, if any, as it may specify therein, exempt from all or any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, any educational, scientific or research organisation engaged in carrying out experiments with insecticides.”
Therefore, it is highly misleading for the Government of India to assure the Court that regulators will prevent farmers from using herbicide on this HT GM mustard crop.
Environment Protection Act 1986 also cannot regulate farmers from using herbicide: Section 15 of EPA 1986 provides for “Penalty for contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules, Orders and Directions”. This applies to whoever fails to comply with, or contravenes any of the provisions of the EPA or the rules made or orders or directions issued thereunder. The permission letter of October 25th 2022 is not a Rule or Order or Direction, and there are no Rules or orders or directions under the EPA which regulate farmers in their usage of herbicides. Under the EPA 1989 Rules, no SBCCs and DLCs function at the ground level in any case, to be implementation arms to the GoI regulators. Therefore, it is once again incorrect on the part of the GoI to assure the Supreme Court that regulators under the EPA will prevent farmers from using herbicide on GM HT Mustard.
In such a situation, the Coalition for a GM-Free India challenges the Government of India to explain how it will prevent farmers from using herbicides on a HT crop, while regulation can certainly prevent farmers from using unapproved GM seeds. Even though the latter powers exist, the GEAC and other regulators already showed their incapability in regulating the vast spread of illegal herbicide tolerant GM cotton in many states of the country.
It is in this context that we demand that the Government of India (a) stop misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court, (b) abide by the SC-appointed independent TEC report recommendations, and (c) ban all HT crops in India immediately, including for field trials.

Comments

V M said…
The coalition is playing with words. The meaning is being misinterpreted. When the Government says that consumption of opium will be penalized, it doesn't mean that the Government is criminalizing the people. Similarly, when the Government says that killing a person will be penalized, it doesn't mean that the Government is criminalizing the people. The rule made by the Government should be understood positively as a deterrent.

TRENDING

Vaccine nationalism? Covaxin isn't safe either, perhaps it's worse: Experts

By Rajiv Shah  I was a little awestruck: The news had already spread that Astrazeneca – whose Indian variant Covishield was delivered to nearly 80% of Indian vaccine recipients during the Covid-19 era – has been withdrawn by the manufacturers following the admission by its UK pharma giant that its Covid-19 vector-based vaccine in “rare” instances cause TTS, or “thrombocytopenia thrombosis syndrome”, which lead to the blood to clump and form clots. The vaccine reportedly led to at least 81 deaths in the UK.

'Scientifically flawed': 22 examples of the failure of vaccine passports

By Vratesh Srivastava*   Vaccine passports were introduced in late 2021 in a number of places across the world, with the primary objective of curtailing community spread and inducing "vaccine hesitant" people to get vaccinated, ostensibly to ensure herd immunity. The case for vaccine passports was scientifically flawed and ethically questionable.

'Misleading' ads: Are our celebrities and public figures acting responsibly?

By Deepika* It is imperative for celebrities and public figures to act responsibly while endorsing a consumer product, the Supreme Court said as it recently clamped down on misleading advertisements.

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

By Rajiv Shah*   The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual. 

Magnetic, stunning, Protima Bedi 'exposed' malice of sexual repression in society

By Harsh Thakor*  Protima Bedi was born to a baniya businessman and a Bengali mother as Protima Gupta in Delhi in 1949. Her father was a small-time trader, who was thrown out of his family for marrying a dark Bengali women. The theme of her early life was to rebel against traditional bondage. It was extraordinary how Protima underwent a metamorphosis from a conventional convent-educated girl into a freak. On October 12th was her 75th birthday; earlier this year, on August 18th it was her 25th death anniversary.

Palm oil industry deceptively using geenwashing to market products

By Athena*  Corporate hypocrisy is a masterclass in manipulation that mostly remains undetected by consumers and citizens. Companies often boast about their environmental and social responsibilities. Yet their actions betray these promises, creating a chasm between their public image and the grim on-the-ground reality. This duplicity and severely erodes public trust and undermines the strong foundations of our society.

'Fake encounter': 12 Adivasis killed being dubbed Maoists, says FACAM

Counterview Desk   The civil rights network* Forum Against Corporatization and Militarization (FACAM), even as condemn what it has called "fake encounter" of 12 Adivasi villagers in Gangaloor, has taken strong exception to they being presented by the authorities as Maoists.

No compensation to family, reluctance to file FIR: Manual scavengers' death

By Arun Khote, Sanjeev Kumar*  Recently, there have been four instances of horrifying deaths of sewer/septic tank workers in Uttar Pradesh. On 2 May, 2024, Shobran Yadav, 56, and his son Sushil Yadav, 28, died from suffocation while cleaning a sewer line in Lucknow’s Wazirganj area. In another incident on 3 May 2024, two workers Nooni Mandal, 36 and Kokan Mandal aka Tapan Mandal, 40 were killed while cleaning the septic tank in a house in Noida, Sector 26. The two workers were residents of Malda district of West Bengal and lived in the slum area of Noida Sector 9. 

India 'not keen' on legally binding global treaty to reduce plastic production

By Rajiv Shah  Even as offering lip-service to the United Nations Environment Agency (UNEA) for the need to curb plastic production, the Government of India appears reluctant in reducing the production of plastic. A senior participant at the UNEP’s fourth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4), which took place in Ottawa in April last week, told a plastics pollution seminar that India, along with China and Russia, did not want any legally binding agreement for curbing plastic pollution.

Mired in controversy, India's polio jab programme 'led to suffering, misery'

By Vratesh Srivastava*  Following the 1988 World Health Assembly declaration to eradicate polio by the year 2000, to which India was a signatory, India ran intensive pulse polio immunization campaigns since 1995. After 19 years, in 2014, polio was declared officially eradicated in India. India was formally acknowledged by WHO as being free of polio.