Regulatory Body’s U-Turn on GM Mustard Baffles Scientists
Change in stance on GM mustard by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee stuns one and all
advertisement
The apex regulatory body for genetically modified crops has undermined its own credibility by altering its decision on GM mustard. At its last meeting on 11 May, the GEAC (Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee) had decided to recommend to the government that approval for commercial release of GM mustard hybrid, DMH-11, be given.
But minutes uploaded on the Environment Ministry’s website on Tuesday, 24 October, say that “matters (sic) related to environmental release of transgenic mustard are kept pending for further review.”
Environment Ministry Reverses Decision on GM Mustard
This is not the decision taken at the meeting on 11 May. Amita Prasad, the chairperson of GEAC, the regulator for GM crops, had told this correspondent on the evening of 11 May that the release of DMH-11 for years had been recommended by all 21 to 26 members present at the meeting with “post-release monitoring” as a condition.
GEAC member B Sesikaran confirmed this on Tuesday.
K Veluthambi, who headed GEAC’s subcommittee which examined the bio-safety dossier on DMH-11 and summarised it for public comments, said the job of GEAC members was over after they had made the recommendation. When told that this meant that they had, in fact, made the recommendation, he said, “Confidentiality demands that I do not say anymore.”
A 31 July release by the Press Information Bureau says:
The release was a reply to a question on GM mustard in the Rajya Sabha.
Recommendations of GEAC Accepted Earlier in May
On 11 May, anti-GM activist Kavita Kuruganti had tweeted, “Shamelessly unscientific & irresponsible. GEAC clears HT GM mustard. V condemn this & Urge Minister to b responsible (sic).”
On 15 May, Kuruganti had made a Facebook appeal to “Act Now, Call PMO to Save Our Food, Farms & Farmers.” The office numbers of the private, principal, and additional secretaries to the Prime Minister were appended for callers to register their opposition. There was urgency to the appeal because:
The MOEFCC (Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change) Kuruganti was referring to, was being led by Environment Minister Anil Madhav Dave, who passed way three days later. The minister could not have given the approval without a recommendation from the GEAC to that effect.
On 27 May, the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS) wrote a letter to the Prime Minister urging the government to accept the recommendation of the GEAC and allow the environmental release of two transgenic parental lines and hybrid DMH-11 “at the earliest.”
Decision Endorsed by the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences
A report by NAAS scientists to rebut “falsehoods perpetrated by GM technology bashers on GM mustard,” also lies about GEAC’s uploaded minutes. It says its general body passed a resolution on 5 June supporting the decision of the GEAC “recommending environmental (commercial) release of GM mustard hybrid DMH-11 and its parental lines.”
The NAAS resolution asked Central and state governments to “immediately endorse the recommendations of the GEAC” so that this winter season could be fully utilised for propagation of parental lines and production of hybrid mustard seed, thus allowing the technology to be available to farmers at a low-cost.
The resolution added:
NAAS is a grouping of agricultural scientists.
When Harsh Vardhan Took Over as Minister
After Dave’s death, Harsh Vardhan became the Environment Minister. He took no action on the GEAC’s recommendation. He said there were arguments to be made both for and against GM crops, when, in fact, there is no evidence of their harm to humans, animals, or the environment.
In 2010, Ramesh had ignored the GEAC recommendation and organised panchayat-style debates in various cities where anti-GM activists outshouted scientists. On that basis, he decided not to approve Bt brinjal for cultivation.
Vardhan was within his powers to not heed the GEAC’s advice because Ramesh had changed it from an approval committee to an appraisal committee. Its advice is not binding. But for a minister to ignore scientific advice would not have been good optics.
Institutions that do not own up to their decisions will inspire little confidence. Some of this government’s actions have had a chilling effect on the agri-biotechnology industry that has resulted in flight of research capital.
Letdown for Technology Providers
In July 2016, Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company (Mahyco) withdrew its application before the GEAC for approval of genetically-engineered insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant cottonseed. It told the GEAC that it was “alarmed” by “recently proposed changes to licensing of technologies” which “raised serious concerns about the protection of intellectual property rights.”
Mahyco’s HT cotton had undergone both stages of bio-safety trials and only approval for cultivation was awaited.
But the herbicide tolerance trait has been pirated and is being extensively used. After a Delhi-based bio-technology advocacy released a report recently that as many as 35 lakh packets of unapproved HT cotton may have been illegally sold this year, the GEAC decided to crack down. However, it has not approved the version of HT cottonseed to offer to farmers who want an affordable alternative to manual weeding.
With its so-called decision on GM mustard, can the GEAC be trusted?
Geneticist and former Vice Chancellor of Delhi University (DU) Deepak Pental and his team, which developed the GM mustard hybrid, are downcast. They feel let down after more than a decade of effort.
(Vivian Fernandes is the editor at www.smartindianagriculture.in. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)