South Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers Movements
636, Ideal Homes Township, Raja Rajeswari Nagar, Bangalore -5600098. Karnataka.
Telephone +91 94444089543 Email: siccfm@gmail.com
Nov 4, 2012
To:
To Whom It May Concern:
Supreme Court of India
In the case of Aruna Rodrigues Vs. Union of India
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2005)
Sub: Requesting the Hon’ble Supreme Court to accept the court-appointed TEC’s
interim report recommendations and order for stopping of all field trials until
conditions met
The South Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers’ Movements(SICCFM) is an alliance of various
farmers movements from the states of Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka. The members are
Karnataka Rajya Raitha Sangha, Tamila Vivasaigal Sangham, Adivai Gothra Mahasabha
Kerela, Kerela Coconut Farmers Association and many others representing thousands of
members.
Two recent reports – one, of the Technical Expert Committee set up by this Hon’ble Court
with five experts from both the petitioners’ and respondents’ side unanimously signing off on
an interim report for the court, and another, of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on
Agriculture which had parliamentarians cutting across all parties unanimously putting out
their report - have reiterated some main points asking for need assessment and assessment
of alternatives before proceeding with open air trials as laid down also by the Task Force on
Agricultural Biotechnology headed by Dr M S Swaminathan in 2004.
The state of the regulatory regime – its design as well as its functioning – have come under
severe criticism again and again in various inquiries including the public debate around Bt
brinjal on which the Government of India announced a moratorium in February 2010. We
would like to point out that what these various reports and inquiries are pointing out is
nothing new, and improvements are also not being witnessed in the state of affairs.
The learned Bench looking into this matter might be aware that there have been several
instances when field trials took place in violation of the existing statutory Rules and of laid
down biosafety norms. The regulators have been approving open air trials without any
capabilities for monitoring. Lack of monitoring is apparent with Bt cotton after its release too.
It is apparent from various civil society investigations, from the very way in which Bt cotton
spread in India illegally and from contamination incidents elsewhere that field trials which are
deliberate releases of untested and new organisms, pose a grave threat. One such incident
came to light in a Monsanto GM maize trial plot in Karnataka and the regulators undertook
an investigation a full year later, showing the lack of acting even on complaints! Further,
there is no liability regime in place to take care of things when they go wrong during such
field trials. It is also well known, and being pointed out by many farmers’ rights advocates
that no contamination testing has ever taken place in our country after field trials. Going by
contamination incidents elsewhere, even small contamination incidents threaten trade
security for our farmers. There has been a recent EU alert on basmati rice consignments’
contamination, as the learned Bench would be aware.
The petitioners of this PIL were therefore absolutely correct in asking for a moratorium on all
open air releases of GMOs. We write to you to kindly accept
in toto the recommendations of
the Committee that this Hon’ble Court itself had set up and ensure that unneeded GM crops
like Bt crops are not allowed into the country including for field trials and that we do not
willfully jeopardize our valuable diversity in germplasm of several crops for which we are the
Center of Origin and/or Diversity by allowing transgenic versions of those crops. WE should
bear in mind that China had prudently not opted for GM soybean, given that soy diversity is
the wealth of that country.
During the Bt brinjal public debate in the country, it became apparent that our biosafety
assessment is faulty. When international scientists started analyzing the biosafety dossiers
presented to the regulators by the company involved, that too after this Hon’ble Court
ordered for such biosafety data be put out for public scientific scrutiny, it became apparent
that our testing regime is inadequate and lacks independent testing in addition to long term
testing. Further, safety interpretation was being wrongly made from data that was obviously
pointing to health and other problems. All of this was publicly acknowledged when the
moratorium was announced by the government. Nothing has changed subsequently in terms
of improvements being brought about. The TEC is absolutely correct in asking for a reexamination
of all biosafety data for approved as well as in-the-pipeline crops.
We believe that transgenics will affect our diversity and that this is an unneeded, hazardous
technology. We welcome the interim report of the TEC of the Supreme Court. We believe
that given that the Government of India also got to nominate its experts into the TEC, they
should abide by the TEC’s recommendations. We urge the Hon’ble Court to immediately
pass all appropriate orders based on the recommendations of the TEC.
Sincerely,
Chukki Nanjundaswamy
Working President, Karnataka Rajya Raitha Sangha(KRRS), Karnataka
Convener, South Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers’ Movements