News blog

India’s biodiversity agency to sue Monsanto

Posted on behalf of K. S. Jayamaran.

The controversy over genetically modified (GM) brinjal (eggplant) in India has taken a new turn with a move to prosecute its developers – further delaying commercial cultivation of the country’s first GM food crop.

Although the insect resistant brinjal carrying the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) gene was cleared by regulators in 2009, the then environment minister Jairam Ramesh imposed an indefinite moratorium on its cultivation in February 2010 (see ‘India’s transgenic aubergine in a stew’). Now the National Biodiversity Authority of India (NBA) has dealt another blow: it has decided to sue the US biotech giant Monsanto and its Indian collaborators who developed the Bt brinjal.

The extraordinary decision by NBA is based on a complaint filed last year by the Bangalore-based Environment Support Group (ESG), alleging that the developers violated India’s Biological Diversity Act of 2002 by using local brinjal varieties in developing Bt Brinjal without prior approval from NBA. Leo F. Saldanha of ESG says his group is hopes NBA will not only launch the legal proceedings soon but also stop processing Monsanto’s recent application to work with two varieties of Indian onions.


While Monsanto has not responeded to the charge, the Maharashtra Hybrid Company (Mahyco) in Mumbai, in which Monsanto has a 26% stake, has denied the charge saying it merely incorporated the Bt gene in the varieties provided by the University of Agricultural Sciences at Dharwad in Karnataka state and provided the technology ‘royalty free’. For its part, the university says the question of violating the law did not arise because it is a public institution and has no commercial mandate.

But Shanthu Shantharam, a biotechnology consultant based in Ellicott City, Maryland and a keen observer of biotech developments in India, says the planned lawsuit is a mistake. “I am simply appalled that NBA’s lawyers have given such a poor advice for it to prosecute the developers of Bt brinjal,” he says. “By this reckoning, all genetic improvements done so far to develop all these local varieties and hybrids would also constitute a violation of the biodiversity act, which is absurd.”

Comments

  1. Report this comment

    Julien said:

    I could not understand that this could be possible ! It’s a shame !

  2. Report this comment

    Dipanjan Basu said:

    Monsanto should first try cultivating genetically modified Bt crops in USA and monitor the effects of these pest resistant varieties on the biodiversity of USA and let people like Shanthu Santharam know the results before attempting to pollute the biodiversity of other third world countries. If they think governments in countries like India are ignorant or fools, they are very wrong.

  3. Report this comment

    P. Fernandes said:

    Since 1995 Bt crops have proved to be very popular with U.S. farmers and have been widely adopted.

    More than 40 genetically modified crops are currently allowed in commerce in the United States and insect resistance (Bt) engineered into four commodity crops (corn, cotton, soybeans, and canola)—dominate the products that have succeeded on the marketplace.

    The news is that there have been no serious environmental impacts—certainly no catastrophes—associated with the use of engineered crops in the United States.

  4. Report this comment

    Francisco G. Nobrega said:

    India gave the world great men and women, and contributed strongly to

    mathematics and physics. It is a shame that this tradition is being

    lost by misguided environmental concerns. Listen to Ingo Potrykus in a recent Nature article and the late Norman Borlaug. Benefit your farmers, people and environment: GM

    plants are green technology, as Stewart Brand, an earlier proponent of

    organic farming, declared and proved in his recent book.

  5. Report this comment

    Manohar Shinde said:

    NSG says Monsanto has violated India’s Biological Diversity Act of 2002 by using local brinjal varieties in developing Bt Brinjal without prior approval from NBA whereas, NBA has decided to sue Monsanto based on NSG’s complaint moreover, BT brinjal, is cleared by regulators in 2009 further, environment minister Jairam Ramesh imposes an indefinite moratorium on its cultivation in February 2010. MAHYCo says it merely incorporated the Bt gene in the varieties provided by the University of Agricultural Sciences at Dharwad in Karnataka state and provided the technology ‘royalty free’. For its part, the university says the question of violating the law did not arise because it is a public institution and has no commercial mandate.If one looks into the entire episode, it signals clearly, there occurred a serious gaffe in inter departmental communication in India. The decentralization of powers are to check the gates at every step by proper communication before clearance by regulators. If there is any flaw in this, then, every institution involved; the NBA, BT regulatory, environmental, agriculture, ICAR, is accountable for not confirming the ethical and environmental issues of the land. I advocate a clean and transparent inter departmental process is the need of the hour. We must also keep in mind we’ve to feed larger population. The overseas companies that enter into international arena must also check the law of the land. What would be the outcome if NBA sues Monsonto for its own gaffe?

Comments are closed.