Tags:
Journalism of Courage
It has taken some time 8212; administrative watch on genetically modified GM crops started in 2002 8212; but India8217;s regulatory capacity on GM issues is coming up nicely to speed. An excellent example is the decision, reported by this paper on Wednesday, to change the regulatory focus on processed food containing GM products. This was preceded by reforms, part judiciary-prodded, making GM approvals more transparent. The list of GM crops under field tests is fairly impressive and though behind China in terms of overall activity, India isn8217;t a poor also-ran either. The key to achieving this level of clarity is not to confuse being careful with being fearful.
A fearful interpretation of the decision on processed food would be that devilishly engineered edibles would find their way to people8217;s stomach. A careful reading tells us that all the government has proposed is to tackle an unnecessary regulatory headache. The Genetic Engineering Approval Committee GEAC should have been looking only at the implications of the 8216;live8217; end of GM activity: GM soya needs monitoring during field tests and in initial stages of commercial cultivation. But if there are questions to be raised about GM soya used in a can of processed food, the GEAC is not the proper forum. The food processing ministry should be the nodal agency. So unless processed food contains GM products that are live 8212; seeds, for example 8212; the GEAC should not bother to spend regulatory time and energy on it.
