DNA Edit: Hope for GM mustard

The approval granted by biotechnology regulator, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), to grow genetically modified (GM) mustard signals a bold shift in the government’s attitude towards GM crops. Only the approval of the Environment Minister Anil Dave remains before the crop can be commercially marketed.

However, the Supreme Court is hearing the matter and the Centre had promised not to take a decision before the court’s final order. When the NDA came to power it had assured that GM crops would not be allowed without proper scientific assessment. But the RSS-affiliated Swadeshi Jagran Manch has been stiffly opposed to the introduction of GM food crops.

The creators of Mustard DMH-11, a transgenic hybrid developed at the Delhi University, claim it yields 20-30 per cent more than the varieties available now. The argument in favour of GM crops is that their higher yields are important for India to keep pace with domestic demand and to stop relying on expensive imports. This had prompted India to introduce Bt-Cotton in 1990.

India’s annual domestic edible oil production of 7.5 million tonnes is dwarfed by imports of edible oil, which is expected to touch 15.5 million tonnes this year. Ironically, much of the edible oil imported into India like rapeseed oil, sold under the Canola brand, and soybean and corn oil, are the products of genetic modification. However, activists warn that the impact of GM crops on native biodiversity, the liability of promoter companies for ecological damage, and toxicity tests on GM crops have not been sufficiently studied or factored in.

They accuse the government of not doing enough to increase acreage of domestic mustard varieties and not promoting high-yielding varieties developed by the Indian Council of Agriculture Research. A parliamentary committee had also questioned the independence of the regulator, GEAC, which includes several bureaucrats, some of whom are from the Department of Biotechnology, which funds biotechnology research.

In contrast to the Bt-Brinjal fiasco, the GEAC appears better prepared and claims to have rigorously interrogated the documents submitted by the GM mustard promoters and responded to nearly 700 comments from the public. Ultimately, the Supreme Court may be the final arbiter on this matter and due diligence of the authorities may decide the issue.