[ad_1]
New Delhi, December 1
As activists categorical concern over potential environmental contamination attributable to genetically modified (GM) crops, the Supreme Court on Thursday sought to know from the Centre if there was any compelling motive for the environmental launch of GM Mustard.
“What we want to know is whether in Indian conditions is there any compelling reason for environmental release of GM mustard, that if we do not do it now, we will be doomed or if you need to have more safeguards and can release it at a later stage,” a Bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Nagarathna instructed Attorney General R Venkataramani.
The Attorney General stated the opposition by activists, consultants and scientists to GM crops was “ideological” relatively than based mostly on scientific rationale.
“We are not on ideology… Our farmers are not like farmers of western countries as far as literacy and awareness is concerned about genes and mutations. No matter how many ‘Krishi Melas’ (agriculture fairs) and ‘Krishi Darshan’ (a TV programme telecast on DD Kisan) we have. That’s the ground reality. We have to look at everything in entirety,” the Bench stated.
The Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) authorized the environmental launch of transgenic mustard hybrid DMH-11 On October 25 and the parental strains containing barnase, barstar and bar genes for use for growing new hybrids.
The prime court docket was listening to petitions filed by Gene Campaign and activist Aruna Rodrigues looking for a moratorium on the discharge of any genetically modified organisms into the surroundings pending a complete, clear and rigorous bio-safety protocol within the public area carried out by businesses of impartial skilled our bodies the outcomes of that are made public.
The Bench – which wished to know if with the environmental launch of the GM mustard seeds there shall be any irreversible penalties – posted the matter for additional listening to on December 7.
Noting that the query was not about compulsion however the course of, Venkataramani stated the federal government has adopted all regulatory processes as per the framework really useful by the Technical Expert Committee (TEC) appointed by the court docket.
“There is nothing problematic as far as process or regulatory framework is concerned. I have demonstrated that all such processes were followed which were recommended by the TEC. We are not blind to the Indian conditions. Question is why are they (petitioners) against it? They have certain anxieties and concerns that are understandable but they are asking why get into this at all. This is an ideological position,” the Attorney General instructed the Bench.
“Experts have given their reasons, which as per you (government) is ideological. Of course, what they say is not the final word and not binding upon the government. It is just their opinion. The Government needs to tell us what is its point of view on the opinions expressed by experts,” the Bench stated.
[ad_2]