Never in the past had crops that we cultivate had to undergo such scrutiny, and rightfully so, as in the case of GE crops.

Genetically Engineered (GE) crops are organisms created artificially in labs through a process called recombinant DNA technology. The unpredictability and irreversibility of Genetic Engineering and the uncontrollability of GE crops in the environment coupled with studies pointing at the potential risk to human health and environment has resulted in a controversy across the world around the need for introducing such potentially risky organisms. This had also resulted in most countries in the world putting in place a precautionary approach towards GMOs reflected in their regulatory systems. India currently has a regulatory system in place, the intention and efficiency of which had been under question.

The debate in India on GE crops had started with Bt cotton, the only commercially approved GE crop in the country (March, 2002) and had become shrillest around the approval of Bt Brinjal, the first GE food crop in India. The fact that government, pointing at precautionary principle, finally rolled back an approval given by GEAC, the apex body for approval of GMOs in our country, has validated the concerns raised by many against the existing regulatory system. While the inadequacy of the existing system had long since been pointed out by many including the Swaminathan Task Force on Agri-biotechnology (2004), it’s shocking the manner in which the Ministry of Science and technology is trying to lower the bar for the approval of GE crops and changing all the rules of the game to quell any future dissent against them.

This is being done through a bill that is to be tabled in the Parliament in the Budget session of 2010. This has been named as The Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India bill.

Flawed process:

The Present bill has its origins in 2005, and a draft version has been in circulation (in 2008). The selective consultations for these were totally biased and were done by the bio-tech consortium of India limited, an agency created to promote biotechnology in India. The Department of Biotechnology drove the process for the erstwhile NBRA and also drives the present version, BRAI.
Several comments were received from the civil society and the scientists, farmers and consumers to change the structures, decision making processes and the need for ethical, and socio economic considerations before approving a GE (genetically engineered) crop. All these have been totally ignored in the present bill.

What is wrong with the bill?

Centralised, bureaucratic decision making with mere advisory role to elected representatives like Ministries and state governments.

The apex authority is the “Biotechnology regulatory authority of India” – (BRAI) with a chairperson, and two members, all scientists with either a bio tech or a health background.

The decision making process:

• Three divisions in BRAI to take applications with GE in agriculture, GE in pharma and GE in industrial or environmental uses.
• A risk assessment unit to evaluate risk and not necessarily to conduct independent tests.
• A product ruling committee to recommend approvals.
• Final decision by the BRAI.

Ministerial representatives are placed among the Inter Ministerial Advisory Board and State Governments are restricted to their respective “State Biotechnology Regulatory Advisory Committee”.

With this structure, neither open air field trials, nor final approvals can be opposed by the state governments.

In comparison, the existing structure provides the final decision of any GE crop to the state governments. There are seven ministerial representatives in the GEAC – can intervene in each and every decision of the authority – a situation required for providing checks and balances on decisions that can have serious ramifications on diverse ranging from a citizens health to the countries trade security.

Conflict of interest between the BRAI and the Ministry of Science &Technology

The BRAI is hosted by the Ministry of Science and technology. Dept of biotechnology – under the ministry of S&T, has the mandate of promotion of GM crops. DBT funds several GE crop development projects using public funds and is the nodal agency for redirecting funds from foreign governments to GM crop development projects. It has been seen with the existing regulatory system where the Review Committee for Genetic Manipulation [RCGM], the committee under the DBT, has been mired in controversies with regard to conflict of interests. Many members of the RCGM are GM crop developers and body itself was sitting with in a department which was promoting GM crops.

With the promotion and regulation of GE crops under the same ministry, there is huge conflict of interest.

Transparency- an option decided by the authority.

The Right to Information Act, 2005(RTI) is been considered as the one of the best tools for ensuring transparency in governance. It has immensely helped the citizen to exercise his/ her democratic rights to know about how our government takes decisions and has been empowering the public in various governance issues.

A recent central information commission order has even made it mandatory for the all bio safety data presented by the company to the regulatory authority to be disclosed to the public even when a GE crop is in a field trial stage. This order, the result of a 30 month long RTI appeal for the bio safety data of GM crops by Greenpeace, can now ensure independent review of the data on GE crops and enables participation of the civil society.

The section 27 (1) and (2) of the BRAI bill super cedes the requirement of the Right to information act and places the decision to disclose information for public interest with the authority instead of the central information commission or the Delhi High court as required by the RTI act 2005. This means that once BRAI is in place the citizen’s right to know about safety of GM crops is killed for ever. This would kill any informed public debate on GM crops in future, one of the aspects that helped in stopping Bt Brinjal.

Penalty for questioning GMOs:

While the decision of GE food is decided by a 3 member bureaucratic system, there is an extreme interest shown in gagging the voice of dissent.

The sec 63.of the bill, says, that persons misleading the public about the bio safety of GE crops without scientific evidence can be imprisoned for 6 months or fined for 2 lakh rupees or both.

This goes against the spirit of precautionary principle which says that even if there is no scientific consensus on the harm ensued evidence of potential harm is enough to stop GM crops from being released in to the environment. BRAI is thus not only violates this golden principle on GM regulation but also is a gag order to keep alternative opinions of scientists, health experts, environmental experts and the fourth pillar of democracy- the free press away from public sphere. It’s a fundamental violation of the basic human rights.

No concept of rollback of approvals, labeling of GE food or liability of the crop developer:
No labeling, liability or rollback of products:

Present day testing procedures of GE crops are grossly inadequate to ensure its safety or ascertain its environmental impacts. Despite this being the case, there are no sections talking about roll back of approvals, or labeling of GE crops, or liability of the crop developer due to economic losses by contamination.

Remediation of contamination :

Following a contamination incident (or in the case of a wrong approval), remediation of the site and redress mechanisms for the affected are required to ensure the safety of public health and the environment. These find no note in the bill.

Socio economic assessments missing:

Socio economic studies for assessing GE crops are not part of the existing regulations. They don’t find any mention in the new one either.

If BRAI is on, safe food is off. Withdraw the bill!

If the BRAI is passed as an act in the parliament this session, Bt Brinjal will be back, and following it is Bt rice, Bt tomato, GE mustard and 40 other food crops.

Minister Chavan’s biotech bill can make approval of unsafe GM food a decision of 3 technocrats; overrule the citizen’s right to know, kill the consumer right choose by refusing labeling while pushing the country into a treadmill of GM foods and jeopardise food security and sovereignty.

The Prime Minister must withdraw the bill and an authority with the mandate for protection of bio-safety must be created. Precautionary principle must be the guiding principle of the policy towards regulating GM crops. A transparent and democratic process must be followed in the creation of this new authority.

Lets join together to stop the bill. It is clear for the consumer, that the end of choice for safe food starts here.

For more information : www.safefoodnow.org

Contact : Jaikrishna R, Sustainable Agriculture Campaigner, Greenpeace India,
mob: 91 98455 91992, Email: jaikrishna.r@greenpeace.org

Bookmark this

New Delhi, 14th October 2009: The Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) today considered the approval of Bt Brinjal at their 97th meeting. Internal sources say that GEAC approved the environmental release of Bt Brinjal although there were three voices of dissent within the committee, including that of Supreme Court observer and noted molecular biologist Dr P.M Bhargava. It is further believed that committee’s recommendations have been sent for the final government approval for commercial release. If approved it will be the first Genetically modified food crop to be approved in India and also the first genetically modified vegetable to be approved for commercial cultivation anywhere in the world.

In January 2009, Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini of Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), France, in his independent scientific appraisal of Mahyco-Monsanto’s Bt Brinjal feeding studies said “Bt Brinjal may present a serious risk for human and animal health and the release should be forbidden.” The first independent scientific commentary of its bio-safety and increasing public opinion against GE foods had forced GEAC to review the data provided by the company.

Bt Brinjal approval process has been mired in controversy due to the complete lack of transparency and vested interest of experts in the committee reviewing the study. “The expert committee members like Dr. Mathura Rai, director of the Indian Institute of Vegetable Research, and Dr. Dilip Kumar of the Central Institute of Fisheries Education are either in partnership agreements with the Mahyco to develop Bt Brinjal or have done the safety tests for it. How can anyone trust a decision from a committee which seems to have an interest in to ensure Bt Brinjal gets the requisite approvals” expressed Jai Krishna, Campaigner, Greenpeace he further said “More importantly, GEAC has not address the fundamental question – does India need GE crops?”.

It took a 30 month long legal battle to bring out the bio-safety studies submitted by Mahyco to GEAC for the approval of its Bt Brinjal. Later in May, a 16 member subcommittee was set up by the GEAC to look into the concerns raised. It was pointed out by many CSO’s including Greenpeace that there is a serious conflict of interest in the sub-committee.

In June 2009, Mr. Jairam Ramesh, the Minister for Environment and Forests, under whose ministry sits GEAC, stated in public forums that he does not support GE foods and there is no great urgency for Bt Brinjal. Civil Society organizations and thousands of consumers have been emailing and faxing Mr. Ramesh on the eve of the meeting, to alert him of the impending GEAC meeting and reminding him of his promise.

If Bt Brinjal approval happens it would open the floodgates to all the 56 crops including 40 other food crops, which are presently undergoing various stages of approval. This in the absence of a labeling law leaves consumers with no choice.

“It is shocking to see that GEAC has mindlessly gone ahead and approved Bt Brinjal even when informed scientists and citizens of this country are raising serious concerns on the nature of the safety studies. GEAC by doing a charade with their regulatory gimmicks is putting the health and environment of our country in danger” said Jai Krishna. “We believe that the decision on Bt brinjal is a decision on food safety and food security of the country and hence should not be made by a beaurocratic body known to take sides with the industry. Now since the final decision is with the government, we hope that our government will stand by the people and not on the side of Seed companies who have a vested interest.”

Meanwhile, there has been growing concern from consumers and in the last one month, around 13 major processed food companies in India have stated their positions to not use GE ingredients in their products. Over 41,000 consumers have so far written to companies demanding companies to become GE free.

Greenpeace demands no approval of GE food crops be given as it is a threat to the health of the citizens and the environment.

For more information contact:
Jai Krishna, Campaigner Sustainable Agriculture, 0-98455-91992, jaikrishna.r@greenpeace.org
Syed Mehaboob, Communications, 0-9731301983, syed.mehaboob@greenpeace.org

Bookmark this

Consumers say no to GE food

Greenpeace activists hung banners at the Nestlé India headquarters in Gurgaon. The banner said: “Nestlé, GM free forever?” questioning Nestlé if they will be GM free forever. Greenpeace volunteers also dressed up as Nestlé’s most popular products — Maggi, Cerelac and Kitkat made a beeline to the office, asking Nestlé officials if they have a GM-free future.

Greenpeace India released a Safe Food Guide[i] in August 2009, ranking companies based on their policies for or against the use of GM[ii] ingredients in their foods. Nestlé was placed in the red category since they had supported the use of GM ingredients. Soon after, bowing to tremendous public pressure created by more than 28,000 cyber activists, Nestlé responded to Greenpeace queries and stated that their products do not contain GMOs as of now in India, since the law prohibits it. However, Nestlé refused to commit future positions, saying taking a future stance on GMOs is “hypothetical”.

In an online Greenpeace poll, nearly 98% of the 4,000[iii] people polled stated that they will not eat GM food even if it becomes available in future. Several companies, who previously had no position on the use of GM ingredients, have given statements that they prefer to avoid GM ingredients in their products. MTR Foods, Britannia, and Ruchi Soya have also said they do not support GM foods.

In September 2009, Nestlé baby food products sampled by Greenpeace were found to be genetically contaminated in China.[iv] “The consumers in India are not satisfied by Nestlé’s declaration of status quo. Nestlé India must have a policy, which ensures that its products are GM-free not only today, but in the future as well said Jaikrishna, Campaigner, Greenpeace India.

Mr.Antonio Waszyk, who heads Nestlé India now, clearly has a much bigger challenge to respond to, than merely ensuring his company’s high profits. Mr Waszyk, 28,000 of your consumers are watching and they want to know if Nestlé is going to be GM-free for the future.,” continued Jaikrishna.

For Further Information contact
Jai Krishna, Campaigner, +919845591992, jr@greenpeace.org
Syed Mehaboob, Communications: +919731301983, syed.mehaboob@greenpeace.org

[i]Greenpeace India launched the Safe Food Guide in August 2009 which categorizes 17 food companies operating in India into a ‘red list’ and a ‘green list’ based on their responses to Greenpeace regarding their policy on the use of genetically modified (GM) ingredients in their food products.

[ii]The guide comes at a time when the Union Government is in the verge of approving genetically modified Bt Brinjal. Following-Bt Brinjal, there are close to 40 other food crops, like rice, tomato, mustard, and potato, which the government may approve. The safety of GE crops as a foodstuff for animals and humans is unknown and the testing regimes inadequate. No amount of testing would prove GM crops are safe for the environment and foodstuff because GM crops are subject to unexpected and unpredictable effects

[iii]The snap poll was conducted online by Greenpeace India and the results can be viewed here: http://greenpeace.in/safefood/poll/

Bookmark this

Located far away in a corner of Bandra East in Mumbai, Kherwadi area is just like any other slum area. Overcrowded markets, overloaded houses and people everywhere make up the essence of this place. The bylanes are so narrow that two people cannot pass by at the same time. Situated in such a place is a self help group run by two strong headed women, namely Sandhya and Kalpana. They run ‘Samta,’ basically a canteen, where around about seven to eight women work to sustain their livelihood, all of them hailing from lower socio-economic background.

But why are we talking about Samta? The reason, they just updated themselves about the growing issue of Genetically Modified food crops in India. Six young volunteers from Greenpeace India visited Samta on the 8th of September 2009 to sensitize these strong willed women about the possible health and environmental hazards of GE (Genetic Engineering) technology.

“Language was a big barrier for us,” says one of the volunteers present, “and to bridge the communication divide, we played a light hearted documentary which demystifies the difficulties in understanding gene technology and its potential ill-effects.”

“This is a very serious issue,” said one of the women in her local language, “people like you and me have to do something about it.” Following this concern were written letters and signed petitions stating that they do not support GM food crops and want it to be banned in India, just like it has been banned in other countries.

They expressed their thanks to the young volunteers and bid farewell, wishing them good luck for their journey towards a cause.

Bookmark this

Supporters are getting younger! Greenpeace national rally on awareness of GE food goes back to school with Sandeepany English School going GM free!

Now this simply means there will be no more GM food on the school premises. That’s really smart considering there are younger consumers here.

Schools are playgrounds of knowledge bearing the dna of our future. Genetic tampering of any sort especially when its in their food can and most likely will cause unpredictable and irreversible effects. Good thing the school authorities know that and acted promptly!

Sandeepany English School, Kodagu took the pledge and is now GM food free!

So long GM food… school is out!

Bookmark this

Thanks to the consumer pressure from over 25,000 concerned customers like you Nestle has finally clarified its stand on GE food.

The good news: Nestle says that as of today it is GE free!
The bad news: Nestle has no problem in having GE in their food if their consumers want it.

It’s time to tell Nestle what our consumer preference is. People in Europe, Russia and Brazil don’t get GE food from Nestle because they have made their choice. It’s time to make our choice!

Read Nestle’s statement

Nestle Response to Greenpeace

Bookmark this

There have been several cases of GM crop disasters in the past. This document takes you through some of the incidents that have been described as accidents and the impact to our food and health in the dangerous world where food is genetically engineered.

Download PDF

Bookmark this

Nestle showed no interest in listening to their customers

The plan was rather clear: we had been collecting products from Nestle consumers for the last two days. Got them – returned to the sender – because consumers would rather have other products than Nestle’s products which cant be trusted to be GM free.

Larger than life nests were made, names of consumers printed and neatly stuck by our volunteers Kuba, Vikrant, Sahai, Debojyoti, Anurag, Naina, Mehul and Sayani, all ready to go.

More than 1000 consumers had pledged to return the products in a span of 20 hours. The total count of people who have demanded Nestle to go GM free has so far crossed 22,000.

Instead the police were brought in to get rid of consumer pressure!

So when we finally arrived, Nestle pulled their cars in (fearing us?), refused to let us even into the reception. They called the police in five minutes and locked themselves up. After the police were satisfied with the reason why we were doing this they demanded that we should take it away, which we promptly refused – we were merely representing consumers.

After Nitin’s amazing ‘dances’ with the police and having made it very clear that we are not going to take them away, we left the area. Last I saw, after more than 2 hours, Nestle’s office remained shut and the nests were having a lot of interesting visitors.

Read the entire News Release at http://greenpeace.in/safefood/news-blog/returned-to-sender/

See a video from ANI http://videosfromindia.smashits.com/view/9544/activists-protest-against-genetically-modified-food

Bookmark this

“How dare someone mess with our food and soil… we will not let that happen!” Voicing strong opinions and demanding their right to safe food, over 70 women of a very shocked Pragathipara Mahila Vedike joined Greenpeace in the national rally against GE food in Coorg by sending over 70 petitions to Nestle demanding that they go GM free.

After the screening of ‘Poison on a Platter’ every woman was left aghast at the effects GM food would have on their health and environment. The gathering of concerned women assured Greenpeace that they would take this further, as far as they needed to go to support this movement.

Just watching the reactions on the faces of the women, any one would have a brief resonance as to being a homemaker who felt cheated on the very food they fed their families.

More associations are awakening to the dangers of GM food and have invited Greenpeace to address their gathering in Coorg and Chikmaglur.

Bookmark this

New Delhi: 16th September 2009: More than 500 consumers today pledged to return their Nestlé products to the company’s corporate office in Rajiv Chowk today, even as Nestlé continued to deny the consumers their right to GM free products. Greenpeace volunteers, who acted on behalf of more than 20,000 consumers across the country, placed the rejected products marked with question marks, into larger than life nests in front of the office building, parodying Nestlé’s well known logo. This symbolized questionable contents of Nestlé products owing to the company’s failure to have a GM free policy.

Greenpeace India released the Safe Food Guide in New Delhi recently ranking 17 major food companies as ‘green’ or ‘red’ on the basis of their policies regarding the use of genetically modified ingredients. Only two companies Nestlé, and Hindustan Unilever had indicated a policy which favoured the use of GMOs.

Hindustan Unilever, which was initially slotted in the ‘red’ list, has since clarified to Greenpeace that it does not use any GM ingredients in its products. This clarification by HUL has made Nestlé, with brands like Maggi, Cerelac, Lactogen, Kitkat and Nescafe, under its umbrella, one of the big brands, openly supporting the use of GM ingredients in its products.

As a result of the pro GM food position indicated by Nestlé, thousands of consumers across the country have started demanding that Nestlé, in sync with its policies in the European Union and Russia, should go GM free in India as well. Over 21000 emails have been sent to the Chairman and Managing Director of Nestlé India, Mr. Antonio Waszyk demanding that Nestlé India go GM free.

Last week, Greenpeace in China discovered Nestlé’s baby food products contaminated with GM ingredients. Like India, Nestlé has had a history of disregard to consumers in China. Soon after the news of this scandal, over a 100 people called the Nestlé India head office demanding a GM free policy from the company.

“Overwhelming public opinion shows that consumers reject GM food as unsafe and unnatural. Nestlé needs to respect consumer choice and declare itself GM free like it has in Europe and Russia. Anything else will be merely a manifestation of double standards. If MTR foods can, why can’t Nestlé” said Jai Krishna, campaigner with Greenpeace India.

(1) Of the 17 major food brands, 6 are in the ‘green’ list. 11 companies are in the red list. In the green list, MTR is the only company to have a policy rejecting GMOs in their food products. For the entire guide log on to www.safefoodnow.org

(2) http://www.greenpeace.org/china/en/news/nestle-baby-food
India has not approved any GM food crops as of today. However there are more than 11 food crops which have been under hundreds of acres of field trials. In addition to this, unauthorized imports of packaged foods and even grains, makes the threat of contamination a reality.

Bookmark this