India’s GM crop regulator recommended the commercial use of genetically modified mustard in a submission to the environment ministry amid opposition by anti-GM groups, including RSS-affiliated bodies.
In its submission, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), the nodal regulator for Genetically Modified (GM) crop, has given a “positive” recommendation– but “with certain conditions”.
With its green signal, the GEAC has pushed the hybrid plant developed by scientists at the Delhi University closer to becoming the country’s first edible GM crop.
The environment ministry has to now take a final call on this.
RSS-affiliate Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM) criticised the move saying allowing the commercial use of GM mustard would impact allied agri-activities.
Some anti-GM activists asserted that in okaying the commercial use of GM mustard, the GEAC has “yet again proven” to be “unscientific and uncaring” to the health of citizens.
They said Environment Minister Anil Madhav should uphold BJP’s manifesto promise that GM foods will not be allowed and reject the GM mustard “just like the Bt brinjal variety was rejected seven years ago”.
It has also put a number of conditions while recommending its commercial use.
“The agenda of GM mustard came up in a meeting of the GEAC today. It has given a positive recommendation. It has recommended the approval of GM Mustard for commercial release,” a Ministry official said.
The Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants (CGMCP), Delhi University South Campus, had submitted an application to the GEAC for the environmental release of GM mustard (Brassica juncea) hybrid DMH-11 and the use of parental events (varuna bn 3.6 and EH2 mod bs 2.99) for the development of a new generation of hybrids.
The environment ministry had received over 700 comments from various stakeholders, including farmers and researchers, on the Assessment of Food and Environmental Safety (AFES) report on GM Mustard, which it had earlier posted on the ministry website.
The application was submitted in 2015 after which several rounds of meeting were held by the GEAC. The sub-committee also convened meetings with experts.
The GEAC also heard the views of various NGOs not in favour of giving an approval to GM crops.
An anti-GM group had earlier alleged that sub committee, did not have any health expert and three of its members have conflict of interest.
Coalition for a GM-Free India had questioned whether the risk assessment report given by the sub-committee, which has claimed that the hybrid does not pose any risk to biodiversity or agro-ecosystem, was even “reliable and scientific” as it had no health experts in it.
Today’s decision, which many of the anti-GM activists were unaware of, got sharp reactions from Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM).
“We are against the commercial use of any genetically modified crops, including the GM mustard. And we will request that the government should not allow its commercial cultivation,” SJM co-convener Ashwani Mahajan said.
The productivity of existing desi varieties are higher than this newly developed GM mustard, Mahajan claimed.
He added that the GM mustard variety would impact allied sectors such as beekeepers, orchards and ayurvedic medicine makers and practitioners.
Environment activist Vandana Shiva had also opposed GM mustard earlier, saying it is “illegal” and developers have done “fraud science”.
Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) general secretary Yudhvir Singh also said the GM mustard technology would not lead to increase in productivity but “monopolise” the seed market.
‘Sarson Satyagraha’, a broad platform of hundreds of organisations representing farmers, consumers and scientists, said the GEAC ignored questions raised by scientists and chose to function behind a “shroud of secrecy”.
“The GEAC has proven yet again that it is unscientific and uncaring to citizens’ health and environment. They have failed in their very mandate and purpose for which they have been created, to protect citizens from risks of GMOs.
“Earlier in the case of Bt brinjal too, they behaved irresponsibly and shamelessly unscientific. In this case, it is a hazardous herbicide tolerant food crop at that, which has direct implications for a large number of Indian farmers, agricultural workers and consumers,” the body condemning the approval said in a statement.