Subscribe
Several environmentalists and other experts have raised objections against the Union government’s proposed modifications on the process to be adopted for verifying conflict of interest of any expert member any committee regulating genetically modified (GM) crops in India.
The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC), on December 31, 2024, proposed amendments in the ‘manufacture, use, import, export and storage of hazardous micro-organisms/genetically engineered organisms or cells rules, 1989’ of the Environment Protection Act, 1986.
The draft notification was issued with a view to ensure transparency in the decision-making process regarding production and import of GMO regulation in the country after a Supreme Court order regarding the same on July 23, 2024.
The order had directed the Union government to develop a national policy on GM crops for research, cultivation, trade and commerce through public consultation. The government is in the process of forming a committee for the same.
However, experts pointed out that there was “nothing significant or effective” in the proposed amendments to ensure transparency in the constitution of the committees and to ensure that those members who are GM crop developers themselves and hold a direct conflict of interest with the regulatory regime itself, were excluded from the decision-making spaces within the regulatory regime.
Under one of the rules of the draft notification, an expert member, who has any direct or indirect association with any agenda coming up for consideration in the meeting of the committee, shall disclose the nature of their interest prior to the meeting. The said member shall not participate in any deliberation or discussion of the committee regarding such matters, “except to provide professional advice if specifically requested by the committee”.
This particular rule, the experts said, narrowed down conflict of interest to ‘agenda items’ in a particular meeting, thus “defying the spirit” of the apex court’s order.
Pointing out that conflict of interest was not about particular agenda items, Coalition for a GM Free India, on February 12, said, “This is narrow because any expert having a direct or indirect conflict of interest in terms of environmental release of a GMO, without the GMO in question of an agenda item being developed by him/her, will influence the decision-making around other applications also in terms of compromising rigorous and comprehensive testing, for the compromised protocols to be applicable to his/her own application.”
The coalition is a platform of organisations and individuals representing farmers, consumers, technical experts and activists and was in the process of writing a letter to MoEF&CC regarding the draft amendments.
“Such members (or their immediate family members — spouse, sibling, child, parent) should not be included in committees or any other roster of experts for any other decision-making in the regulatory regime,” the statement by the coalition said.
The ministry’s draft was open to public objections and suggestions for a period of 60 days, from the date of publishing of the notification (December 31).
The proposed amendments have placed the responsibility of disclosing conflict of interest on the expert members. As per the rules, any expert member shall disclose his/her interest, which may conflict with his/her duties. Further, the expert member shall take all steps necessary to ensure that any conflict of interest to which he/she may be subject to, does not affect any decision of the committee, said the notification.
The member “shall immediately” after his/her appointment as an expert member in the committee, submit a declaration disclosing a conflict of interest at the earliest possible opportunity to the chairman of the concerned committee.
To this, the experts said it cannot be left to the member to take all steps necessary to ensure that any conflict of interest does not affect any decision of the committee and called the rules a “mockery of the very need” to make this amendment.
They also pointed out that the notification does not have anything explicitly included to keep out public-private consortia like BCIL (Biotech Consortium India Limited) from decision-making process.