<p>The Coalition for a GM-free India on Friday slammed the Union government for rushing through genetically modified food crops that are herbicide-tolerant (HT) by violating the Supreme Court-appointed technical committee's (TEC) recommendations.</p>.<p>In a report released to the media, the citizens' platform listed 15 instances of serious regulatory lapses in the appraisal and approval of the GM mustard crop and said the Union government was trying to mislead the apex court on at least five issues related to the GM mustard.</p>.<p>The report said the government violated its own undertaking in the court by allowing planting of herbicide tolerant GM mustard in 6 locations in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Punjab without isolation distances.</p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/main-article/do-we-need-gm-mustard-1167249.html" target="_blank">Do we need GM mustard?</a></strong></p>.<p>The report said the mustard seeds did not undergo even the limited testing that the brinjal seeds underwent. While Brinjal is grown in about 7 lakh hectares, mustard is grown in 80 lakh hectares, the report said, noting that the negative effect on the number of people was much higher.</p>.<p>Moreover, it noted, the GM mustard was never tested as a HT crop and India doesn't have any guidelines and protocols for testing the HT crops. The expert appraisal committee had fixed guidelines for herbicide tolerant crops other than GM mustard, from bio efficiency of the herbicide to residue analysis in soil, effect of leftover residues on succeeding crops and the impact on insects and soil organisms. But the committee didn't apply the tests to the mustard crop.</p>.<p>The other major violations cited by the coalition included lack of an oversight by an independent health expert, lack of tests to ensure that the parental lines do not pose risk to the seed environment, violation of statutory protocols, conflict of interest in the regulatory regime and testing among others.</p>.<p>Kavitha Kuruganti of the Coalition said the Attorney General (AG) has been attempting to move the Supreme Court Bench’s attention away from the Court-Appointed TEC’s ban with regard to HT crops. The TEC's ban recommendation on HT crops is based on scientific evidence and after listening to various stakeholders.</p>.<p>"The Government of India-nominated experts into the TEC were also asking for this ban along with three other independent experts nominated by the petitioners. This should have clinched matters and the government should have banned these dangerous crops. We sincerely urge the Court to pass orders that indeed ban HT crops given the numerous hazards that they bring in. Similarly, a ban on transgenics in all those crops for which we are the centre of origin and/or diversity.</p>.<p>Mustard is one such crop. However, we are also cognisant of the arguments being put up by the AG defending India’s regulatory regime. He was heard asking the Bench to look into whether there is an adequate regulatory mechanism or not, and if they are able to find any deficiencies in the regulatory processes. It is against this backdrop that we are putting out this report, to show serious and objectionable deficiencies, and how the appraisal and approval of GM mustard showcase the story of a compromised regulatory regime in India”, Kavitha said.</p>
<p>The Coalition for a GM-free India on Friday slammed the Union government for rushing through genetically modified food crops that are herbicide-tolerant (HT) by violating the Supreme Court-appointed technical committee's (TEC) recommendations.</p>.<p>In a report released to the media, the citizens' platform listed 15 instances of serious regulatory lapses in the appraisal and approval of the GM mustard crop and said the Union government was trying to mislead the apex court on at least five issues related to the GM mustard.</p>.<p>The report said the government violated its own undertaking in the court by allowing planting of herbicide tolerant GM mustard in 6 locations in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Punjab without isolation distances.</p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/main-article/do-we-need-gm-mustard-1167249.html" target="_blank">Do we need GM mustard?</a></strong></p>.<p>The report said the mustard seeds did not undergo even the limited testing that the brinjal seeds underwent. While Brinjal is grown in about 7 lakh hectares, mustard is grown in 80 lakh hectares, the report said, noting that the negative effect on the number of people was much higher.</p>.<p>Moreover, it noted, the GM mustard was never tested as a HT crop and India doesn't have any guidelines and protocols for testing the HT crops. The expert appraisal committee had fixed guidelines for herbicide tolerant crops other than GM mustard, from bio efficiency of the herbicide to residue analysis in soil, effect of leftover residues on succeeding crops and the impact on insects and soil organisms. But the committee didn't apply the tests to the mustard crop.</p>.<p>The other major violations cited by the coalition included lack of an oversight by an independent health expert, lack of tests to ensure that the parental lines do not pose risk to the seed environment, violation of statutory protocols, conflict of interest in the regulatory regime and testing among others.</p>.<p>Kavitha Kuruganti of the Coalition said the Attorney General (AG) has been attempting to move the Supreme Court Bench’s attention away from the Court-Appointed TEC’s ban with regard to HT crops. The TEC's ban recommendation on HT crops is based on scientific evidence and after listening to various stakeholders.</p>.<p>"The Government of India-nominated experts into the TEC were also asking for this ban along with three other independent experts nominated by the petitioners. This should have clinched matters and the government should have banned these dangerous crops. We sincerely urge the Court to pass orders that indeed ban HT crops given the numerous hazards that they bring in. Similarly, a ban on transgenics in all those crops for which we are the centre of origin and/or diversity.</p>.<p>Mustard is one such crop. However, we are also cognisant of the arguments being put up by the AG defending India’s regulatory regime. He was heard asking the Bench to look into whether there is an adequate regulatory mechanism or not, and if they are able to find any deficiencies in the regulatory processes. It is against this backdrop that we are putting out this report, to show serious and objectionable deficiencies, and how the appraisal and approval of GM mustard showcase the story of a compromised regulatory regime in India”, Kavitha said.</p>