Supreme Court tells Centre to formulate policy on genetically modified crops; gives split verdict on approval for GM Mustard

Dealing with a plea by NGO Gene Campaign and others, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol gave divergent opinion on the validity of the two decisions and directed the matter be listed before the CJI D Y Chandrachud for setting up an appropriate bench for adjudication.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to formulate a national policy with regard to genetically modified (GM) crops for research, cultivation, trade and commerce in the country, while rendering a split verdict on the validity of the 2022 decision by the Union government granting conditional approval for environmental release of genetically modified (GM) mustard crop.

On October 18, 2022, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) -- a statutory body under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and regulator of genetically modified organisms in the country -- recommended the environmental release.

Subsequently, another decision was taken on October 25, 2022 approving the environmental release of transgenic mustard hybrid DMH-11, a variety of GM mustard.

Dealing with a plea by NGO Gene Campaign and others, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol gave divergent opinion on the validity of the two decisions and directed the matter be listed before the Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud for setting up an appropriate bench for adjudication.

In view of the difference of opinion on the decision of the GEAC and MoEF granting conditional approval for environmental release of DMH-11, the court directed the registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice of India for constituting an appropriate bench to consider the said aspect afresh.

In its 409-page judgment, the bench, however, was unanimous in its finding that judicial review of both the October 18 and October 25 orders of GEAC is permissible.

It directed the Centre to evolve a national policy with regard to GM crops in the realm of research, cultivation, trade and commerce in the country.

"The said national policy shall be formulated in consultation with all stakeholders, such as experts in the field of agriculture, biotechnology, state governments, representatives of the farmers, etc," the bench directed.

The court said the MoEF&CC shall conduct a national consultation, preferably within the next four months, with the aim of formulating the national policy on GM crops.

It also said the state governments should be involved in evolving the national policy on GM crops.

The bench further directed the Union government to ensure that all credentials and past records of any expert who participates in the decision-making process should be scrupulously verified and conflict of interest, if any, should be declared and suitably mitigated by ensuring representation to a wide range of interests.

The rules in this regard may be formulated having a statutory force, it said.

Regarding importing of GM food and more particularly GM edible oil, the bench said the Centre shall comply with the requirements of Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), 2006, which deals with packaging and labelling of foods.

With regard to October 18, 2022 and October 25, 2022 decisions, Justice Nagarathna termed those as vitiated, for being in gross violation of the principle of public trust.

She said there was no representative of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Ministry of Health in the meeting and the matter was not considered from the paradigm of the adverse effect on the health of human beings and animals as well as on other plants in the event of environmental release.

Justice Karol, however, did not agree with the views of Justice Nagarathna and held that ban on GM crops is not warranted as it is a policy decision.

"The question of ban on HT (GM) crops is not warranted in view of the precautionary principle and it is a decision squarely within the domain of policy," he said in his separate 140-page verdict.

He held that the composition of the GEAC is in accordance with the rules and no fault can be found with the same.

Separate pleas were filed by activist Aruna Rodrigues and NGO 'Gene Campaign' seeking a moratorium on the release of any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment pending a comprehensive, transparent and rigorous biosafety protocol in the public domain conducted by independent expert bodies.