Farm fresh GE fear of the future?

 

 

In implementing an administrative and scientific decision of far reaching import in the agriculture sector, the government has chosen to be surprisingly reticent pertaining to both its pronouncements, as well as findings. Judicial intervention and some old-fashioned digging of dirt by activists and lawyers is the outcome, resulting in total confusion and a maze of half-truths and innuendoes. The policies governing seeds and crops in India are on the verge of being derailed. The large multinational companies like Monsanto, Bayer and Cargill are at the receiving end of the ire of the activists, as they are perceived to be the neo-Mahajans, as farmers are already reeling under the onslaught of the moneylenders.

The decision of the Supreme Court of India on field trials of genetically engineered (GE) crops (a crop genetically modified, so that it becomes self-resistant to pests) is a stalemate for all parties. The Court has permitted the field trials, which had already been approved by the apex Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) between May and September 2006, with more stringent guidelines than earlier. The isolation distance of Bt crops has been increased to 200 meters from five metres. In addition, a scientist will be appointed to oversee all aspects of the trials. It is also worth recalling that the GEAC does not have a set date for its meetings and quorum for decision making.

According to the experts, the approach and attitude of the GEAC, which comes under the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), can only be termed unsatisfactory. When Divya Raghunandan of Greenpeace filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) on 23 February 2006, seeking a list of locations of field trials conducted on Bt Okra, brinjal, tomato, rice and mustard and data related to toxicity and allergens, it was struck down by the DBT. When the Central Information Commission (CIC) ordered the DBT to furnish data of bio-safety tests and field trials, the department refused to comply. This raised suspicions. What does the government want to conceal? DBT states that the data is in the process of being generated and it has not been submitted to the department. Activists have challenged this reasoning. According to Divya, “The argument can, at best, be called misleading, as in an earlier communication on 31 January 2007 with Dr. S. Natesh, the appellate authority, DBT, the response was different. The DBT had then stated that toxicity and other data are under the consideration of the department. Allegations of non-compliance with guidelines on field trials have been widely reported. In Haibatpur village of Haryana’s Karnal district, Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) activists burnt standing crops of Bt rice. They did so, because field trials for Bt rice were being secretly conducted, without informing the district administration. Even the Gram Panchayat was not taken into confidence. “We were completely kept in dark. When we learnt about it, we burnt the crop. It was very gratifying,” village headman Mahinder Singh, happily informed TSI.

Further investigations revealed that the company had bribed farmer Paramjit Singh, whose land was used for testing. It also surreptitiously managed to get the approval of sarpanch, Kamla Devi. She claims that they managed to get her signature fraudulently, as she is illiterate and this is not an isolated incident.

More seriously, a committee constituted by the Directorate of Agriculture, Chhattisgarh, has found MAHCYO, a subsidiary of Monsanto, guilty of gross violations in conducting field trials. The report states that MAHYCO has not followed the norms and conditions laid out by the DBT, as mentioned in its letter permitting trials. MAHCYO should have informed the state government, the Directorate of Agriculture, the state agricultural university (SAU) and the district authorities, prior to conducting the trials, which they failed to do so. The findings also stated that the scientists of SAU and officers of the state agriculture department should have been consulted for site selection as well as in conducting experiments as per norms which the company has failed to do. The results of experiments in the field at some other places too are questionable. In the Adilabad district of Andhra Pradesh where Bt cotton is grown commercially, the animal husbandry department has appealed to the farmers not to graze their animals on Bt cotton fields. Cattle grazing on those fields exhibited symptoms like shivers, convulsions, running nose and bloody diarrhoea. More than 2,600 livestock are reported to have perished. In November 2005, in the Nimad region of Madhya Pradesh, genetically modified Bt cotton caused allergic reaction in both man and animal. Families in the villages of Dhar and Badwani district were reportedly admitted to hospitals while handling the crop.

While the pressure of human population on land is mounting, the challenge to attain food security has become greater. While GE crops are being portrayed as the crops of the future, some experts are not enthused. They say that by concealing data evaluation of field trials, many questions have cropped up. Would companies who have the authority to reveal results of field tests produce an adverse report? Lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who has also filed a PIL, alleges that the country has become testing grounds for vested interest. The data pertaining to toxicity, allergens should be immediately made public.

Clearly, the GE policy in the country has been shrouded in secrecy. It is an intricate issue that needs to be dealt in a coherent manner and after taking each party concerned into confidence. In the face of government inaction, the courts have come forward to set field test and bio-safety protocols that are otherwise the prerogative of the government. Conflict of interest

Is there any connection between the interests of Indian officials and multi-nationals? Here is a reality check.

Dr. C. D. Mayee Co-Chairman of GEAC is also board member of an international network funded by Monsanto, Bayers and Dupont. His son is reported to have married the daughter of Vijay Kashikar, a director in Ankur Seeds on 23 January this year. Ankur Seeds is one of the companies manufacturing Bt cotton in India, which has been permitted to sell its genetically engineered crops.

Dr. T. V. Ramaiah Ex-Member Secretary, Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation. He is responsible for more than 100 approvals of GM field trials in the country. He has quit his post to join Pioneer Hi Bred International. He is also spokesperson of All India Crop Biotechnology Association.

Dr. B. M. Khadi Director CICR. Has been portrayed as an independent expert at a time when it is working to get approvals for its GM cotton varieties from the GEAC.