Let experts, not babus regulate biotech: Swaminathan to Govt

This is what the people on both sides of the biotechnology debate in the country have been crying hoarse for: a professional regulatory mech...

This is what the people on both sides of the biotechnology debate in the country have been crying hoarse for: a professional regulatory mechanism for Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).

In a report submitted today, the M S Swaminathan task force on biotechnology has asked for a statutory and autonomous National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority (NBRA) on the lines of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board.

Until that comes into effect, at least have an ‘‘outstanding biosafety and technical expert’’ incharge of clearing GMOs, says the report.

Story continues below this ad

class="ad-slot">

The existing apex regulatory body called the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) has seen six chairmen in the last two years as a bureaucrat, the Additional Secretary in the Ministry of Environment and Forests, becomes the head of GEAC.

Also in the interim, the GEAC should have two wings, one to deal with transgenics in agriculture and the other in the pharma sector.

The report, however, is silent on the contentious but important fact: the proposed NBRA’s parent Ministry — Environment or Agriculture. ‘‘This has been left for the government to decide. That suggestion from me would have distracted from other important aspects of the recommendations,’’ said Swaminathan.

The absence of a professional regulator has come with a heavy price: it took four years of trials to clear the first Bt cotton and another two years to clear three more varieties of the same gene of Bt cotton. The system is so weak that illegal varieties of Bt seeds spread all over the country went undetected for years. The industry is exasperated with long waits and the NGOs complain about lack of transparency.

Story continues below this ad

The panel report criticised the existing process of clearance as “as lengthy and cumbersome’’ and says ‘‘It needs review and rationale. We recognise need for reduction in the level and number of steps required in evaluation and environmental clearance of GMOs.’’

The panel has suggested that the release, notification and registration of transgenic crops for commercial cultivation should be done by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) under the Union Agriculture Ministry. The GEAC should only concern itself with ‘‘environmental and biosafety clearance’’.

ICAR, in turn should devise a mechanism to concurrently run Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU) trials for those GM crops cleared by GEAC. This comes from the philosophy that GM option should only be exercised when all other options to achieve the desired objectives are not available or not feasible. It should not be permitted in Darjeeling tea, basmati rice or even soyabean, where trade interests would be affected.

The report gives in detail the structure of NBRA that should be chaired by an eminent biotechnologist and have five part-time members having expertise in agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries and forestry, health and food safety, environment, intellectual property rights and legal affairs. It should have a standing advisory committee consisting of nominees of state governments.