In a strongly worded submission to the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, public policy expert Dr. Donthi Narasimha Reddy has signaled a red alert: the Pesticides Management Bill, 2025, in its current form, is a paper tiger. Without sweeping amendments, this legislation risks becoming yet another ineffective administrative measure, incapable of stemming the tide of pesticide-related deaths and chronic health crises that continue to haunt India.
Addressed to the Secretary at Krishi Bhavan, Dr. Reddy’s detailed 80-page critique argues that while the Bill introduces progressive elements like digital databases, it remains shackled to the outdated philosophy of the 1968 Insecticides Act. This fragmented regulatory landscape is precisely what has allowed devastating tragedies—from the 2013 Bihar poisonings to the recent 2025 Mysuru disaster—to repeat with sickening regularity.
The fundamental failure of the Bill lies in its institutional architecture and its blindness to the modern realities of chemical exposure. Dr. Reddy identifies a weak institutional hierarchy where the Registration Committee functions as a parallel power center, rendering the Central Pesticides Board a mere advisory body without binding enforcement powers.
This lack of accountability is compounded by a complete absence of traceability for the farm-to-fork chain of custody. In an era of e-commerce, unregulated digital pesticide sales and the continued circulation of banned substances like monocrotophos persist because the law lacks the teeth to track them.
Furthermore, the Bill ignores the "invisible" victims of the pesticide industry. By failing to include women who wash contaminated clothes or informal family laborers in its definition of "workers," the legislation creates a critical gender and labor protection gap that leaves the most vulnerable populations entirely exposed.
To transform this symbolic gesture into a robust tool for public health, the Ministry must incorporate a comprehensive suite of 54 amendments. This starts with renaming the legislation to the "Pesticide (Production, Distribution and Use) Management Bill, 2025" to reflect a broader, more defensive scope.
Central to this reform is the regulation of "ordinary use" pesticides. Household and institutional pest control currently account for over 60% of poisoning deaths in India—as seen in the recent Chennai and Mysuru fatalities—yet the Bill virtually ignores this sector. Dr. Reddy proposes a dedicated chapter to regulate pest control operators, mandate re-entry safety protocols after fumigation, and ensure strict segregation from food and water sources.
Beyond household safety, the Bill must establish a systematic poisoning surveillance system akin to the framework used for vaccine adverse events. Currently, hospitals lack the diagnostic criteria and national registers needed to respond to mass poisonings. This must be paired with strict corporate liability; Dr. Reddy advocates for a "Pesticide Victim Relief Fund" and legal provisions that prevent corporate directors from using a "lack of knowledge" defense to evade responsibility.
The Central Pesticides Board itself must be diversified to include female farmers, agricultural workers, and civil society representatives to prevent it from becoming a bureaucratic rubber stamp. This inclusive governance is essential to ensure that the regulator remains accountable to those most impacted by its decisions.
Dr. Reddy’s submission is a reminder that every day of legislative delay exacts a human cost. The tragedies in Yavatmal, Chennai, and Mysuru are not "accidents" of fate; they are the direct results of regulatory gaps that this Bill currently fails to plug.
As the legislation advances toward Parliament, the Ministry has a brief window to move beyond mere paperwork and create a framework that prioritizes human lives over chemical convenience. Only by embracing these 54 amendments can the government ensure that the PMB 2025 becomes a genuine shield for India's farmers, workers, and consumers, rather than a witness to the next avoidable tragedy.
Comments