The Hindu Business Line : GM crop

A May 9 press release of the Ministry of Environment and Forests has created considerable confusion in the public mind that the Supreme Court has vacated the stay on further field tests of all GM (genetically modified) crops that had been obtained by a PIL (public interest litigation) and which had been pending almost for a year. It is important to recall that on September 22, 2006, the Supreme Court had passed an order that the entire question of field testing and approval of GM crops should be handled by competent, knowledgeable and committed bodies/scientists. The question then before the court was with regard to Bt brinjal, which an MNC was promoting.

Accordingly, an independent expert committee was constituted by the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture in Hyderabad, which had some of the leading toxicologists, plant physiologist, entomologist, agronomist and economist of the country. The committee submitted its report in mid-October. Since then the Union of India has been seeking modification of the order passed by the court on September 22, 2006. By the said order, the Court had directed the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) to withhold approvals till further instructions to be issued by the court on hearing all concerned.

Trials approved

In the May 8 hearing that followed, the Additional Solicitor-General submitted that in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court, the GEAC was not in a position to grant approval to various applications pending with the authority. All these applications were for conducting field trials on various plant varieties. The GEAC, during the period May 2 to September 22, 2006, granted approval for 24 items including Bt cotton, Bt cauliflower, Bt brinjal, Bt rice, transgenic rice, Bt castor, Bt groundnut, transgenic tomato, and potato. The field trials are going on in respect of these items and the court in the said order noticed that 91 field testings have been going on.

The May 8 Supreme Court order specifically states that

The GEAC shall take sufficient precautions to see that these trials do not cause any contamination to neighbouring fields;

There should be at least 200 m distance between trial fields and the neighbouring ones where the same type of crop is grown;

In all the trials, the name of the scientist and other details of who will be responsible for all aspects of the trials should be reported to the GEAC and there should be regular supervision by them; and

Prior to bringing out the GM material from the greenhouse to the field, for open field trials, the approved institution should submit a validated, specific test protocol at an LoD (level of detection) of at least 0.01 per cent to detect and confirm that there has been no contamination.

What is happening

The independent expert committee on Bt brinjal noted several instances of scientific inaccuracy in data reporting, breach of properly laid-out scientific protocols, improper reporting of allerginicity and toxicity that are of paramount concern to both humans and animals.

The manner in which these field trials are being conducted leaves so much to be desired. Gullible farmers are being tricked into accepting GM material for field-testing without being made aware of the possible adverse consequences. In a country like India, where land is scarce and where most farms are less than 1 ha. how does one ensure a distance of 200 m between a GM field-trial and a normal field with the same crop?

The recent experience of cattle and goat grazing of Bt cotton fields leading to mortality has become an alarming concern and, yet, nobody seems to be addressing this crucial question — not the GEAC, the Department of Biotechnology nor the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The situation, to say the least, is disturbing.

The Maharashtra Agriculture Minister, Mr Balasaheb Thorat, is on record that Bt cotton is a failure in Vidharbha district, the cotton bowl of the State, and yet, why is the Government of India pushing for so many new strains of Bt cotton?

Mr Thorat, according to newspaper reports, said, "The much-hyped and high-priced Bt cotton seeds are only adding to the burden of the farmers."

Hand forced

What needs to be noted in this context is that the authorities concerned were not keeping in public domain several crucial facts pertaining to the test data, under the garb of "commercial interest," until the petitioners, with Greenpeace's assistance, moved under the Right to Information Act and the Central Information Commission (CIC) had no other option but to order release of all vital information. In addition to the PIL, there is also a farmers' impleadment before the Supreme Court Bench to halt GM crops.

It is not for nothing that some of the best scientific minds around the world, including in India, have questioned the usefulness of recombinant DNA technology which is at the heart of GM crops and many a knowledgeable scientist has termed it a "half-baked science". Farmers in Haryana, Chattisgargh, Ramanathapuram have defied law and burnt Bt rice fields fearing contamination.

Should a sovereign nation like India jump on to the GM bandwagon against all proven scientific facts when even a small nation like Mexico, in the backyard of the US, had the courage to say an uncertain no to GM technology in maize, because that country happens to be the place of origin for maize.

Yet, India is issuing a "blank cheque" for any GM crop, be it brinjal, which originated here, or rice in which India has a tremendous export stake. Are we being pushed and if so by who?

(The author, a former National Science Foundation Professor, Royal Society, Belgium, is Chairman of the Independent Expert Committee to look into the various aspects of Bt brinjal. He can be contacted at nair_kpp @yahoo.com)

More Stories on : Bio-tech & Genetics | Insight

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
A benchmark for interest

Exit for exit polls?

Wiring up small grids for mega power

GM crop — trial and error

As China attempts to cool — India now a hot destination for FDI

Ethics and business

How does a democracy change gears on the growth highway

Climate change