An independent scientific analysis released by environmental organization Greenpeace India exposed major flaws in the Genetically Modified corn biosafety assessment process by the regulatory bodies in India. Greenpeace India had asked Testbiotech, an independent research agency, to assess data presented by the US biotech giant, Monsanto, to the Indian authorities ‘for biosafety tests prior to commercial approval’ of its GM corn variety MON89034xNK603 [...] The biosafety and field trials data of the said GM corn data was accessed by Greenpeace through RTI procedures from the Department of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee, which is the nodal agency for all environmental releases of GMOs in India.

The report of a committee set up by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) in January 2012, headed by Prof S K Sopory to look into the curious case of Monsanto’s gene ending up in public sector-developed Bt cotton is being seen as fair and thorough by many; there is also a view that the inquiry process left out some key players and that ICAR is shielding some of its own. The report is indeed a scathing indictment on public sector research and ICAR headquarters’ functioning, raising questions related to capabilities, scientific ethics and integrity. Accountability questions also arise, given that taxpayers’ funds are being used for such public sector research. Importantly, the Sopory committee report also points to serious shortcomings with transgenics’ regulation in the country.

It has been called the biggest wave of human suicides in recorded history. Every 30 minutes a farmer in India commits suicide, crushed — say human-rights activists — by debt, moneylenders and the destructive policies associated with the introduction of expensive genetically modified cotton seed. Prince Charles has spoken of the “truly appalling and tragic rate of small farmer suicides in India, stemming in part from the failure of many GM crop varieties.” Britain’s Daily Mail called it “The GM genocide.” Except linking suicides to GM seeds is simply not true. “The issue of farmer suicides is not just entirely a farmer issue, or rural issue, or a village issue — it is a much more broader political-economic problem,” said Raju Das, a developmental studies professor at York University.

“India is a major importer of edible oils. We spend to the tune of Rs 60,000 crore on edible oil imports. Of this, soya oil is a big chunk. If soya GM crop is taken up on a large scale in India, its output and that of oil extracted from it would increase considerably and at some time exports may not be required,” said Pawar adding that he suspected that MNCs that would be hit hard could be funding campaigns against GM soya crop in India. Similarly, he discounted opposition to Bt cotton saying this appeared only in media. “If Bt cotton crop was not good, why would 92% of cotton growers switch over to it of their own volition,” asked Pawar noting that cotton crop last tear was remarkable. He made these remarks at the VED council conference on Saturday evening as well as at the press conference here on Sunday before sharing the dais with BJP leader Nitin Gadkari at a chemists’ conference.

When rich companies with politically-connected lobbyists and seats on government-appointed bodies bend policies for their own ends, we are in serious trouble. In the US, many senior figures from the Genetically Modified Organisms industry have moved with ease to take up positions with the Food and Drug Administration. In 1998, senior Monsanto figure Phil Angell stated in the New York Times Magazine that Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food and that its interest is in selling as much of it as possible, while assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.

Dismissing Parliamentary panel’s suggestion to halt all field trials of genetically modified crops, Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar has said the government can’t take “luxurious decision of banning” them as such kind of farm research is important for ensuring food security. [...] According to sources, the ministry has stated that the stopping of field trails of GM crops in states will be a “blow” to Indian science as it would push the country behind in scientific research in comparison to fast growing economies like Brazil and China who are developing GM crops.

German seeds and agrotech group Bayer CropScience Ltd, which has been asked by the Bombay High Court to compensate a group of farmers in Maharashtra for supplying inferior Bt cotton seeds, plans to challenge the order, claiming that bad climate and poor crop management were responsible for the farmers’ losses. The aggrieved farmers have claimed that the seeds they bought from the company were of bad quality and that this was proved by an inspection of the agriculture department of Maharashtra government.

The second Indian Biodiversity Congress (IBC 2012) held at Bangalore earlier this month has called for a ban on field trials of Genetically Modified crops in India and a 10-year moratorium on Bt food crops.

The three-day event, which witnessed a large turnout of scientists, conservationists, environmentalists, civil society groups and local communities from across the country, stressed the need to bring the regulation of biotechnological processes and products under the purview of the Biodiversity Act. For the purpose, the Department of Biotechnology should be brought within the Ministry of Environment and Forests, it suggested. The recommendations, issued by the IBC secretariat in Thiruvananthapuram, urged the government to exclude GM crops from India’s food security programmes and farming systems. It opposed the move to set up the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India to clear the cultivation of GM crops and instead proposed the adoption of the National Biosafety Protection Regime.

With dengue and malaria wrecking havoc in the country this year, genetically modified mosquitoes seemed like a good option to get rid of the twin diseases. But field testing of the GM mosquitoes is still a long way off. [...] Speaking on the sidelines of the Global Meet of Biologists, Dr P. Jambulingam, director, Vector Control Research Centre, said, “There are many issues. Conducting laboratory tests is one thing and field testing another. There is no guarantee about the competence of GM mosquitoes.” He added, “Social acceptance is another issue. There is no proof that these mosquitoes will not cause any side-effects. There are doubts if people will embrace the technology.”

Sharply criticising Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s call for a structured debate on genetically-modified instead of becoming fearful and swayed by emotion at the 100th Science Congress, Greenpeace India campaigner Karuna Raina said his statement was an attempt to discredit the anti-GM movement, which has been asking for a national debate. “The prime minister’s statement comes at a time when there is a growing opposition from across the society on GM crops. The last decade has also seen a growing opposition to GM crops in the country. The ensuing debate has also raised serious concerns on the complete failure of the GM regulatory systems, an issue also highlighted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture in its report on GM crops tabled in the last Monsoon session of Parliament.