Press Release - February 25, 2010 [BRAI is Anti-RTI]
| 
| 
Biotechnology Regulatory Authority will sent Media professionals and Activist to jail for airing opinion on GM
“Obtaining information under RTI wouldn’t be possible under BRAI”
“The proposed Biotechnology Regulatory Authority (BRAI) as introduced in this session of parliament will take away the right to protest and speak against bullying activities and illegalities by corporations and government on genetically modified food.” Eminent lawyers and social activist who met at Lajpat Rai Bhawan here today expressed their fears about the control over freedom of speech of the media and common people by using the draconic powers of Section 63 of the proposed biotechnology Act.
Quoting from the text of the bill, as placed in the parliament, eminent lawyer Reeta Kohli said that the Section 63 is a direct assault on the media’s freedom of speech, which reads, “Whoever, without any evidence or scientific record misleads the public about the safety of the organisms and products shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to one year and with fine which may extend to two lakh rupees or with both.” This is more draconic than acts like TADA, POTA, etc. and is a clear violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution.
Social activist Hemant Goswami said that “The proposed ‘Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill, 2009’ does not have any provision to punish corporate and people who conceal adverse effect of genetically modified organisms and food. Even unauthorized field trial of genetically modified crop has not been made a punishable offence. Only unauthorized clinical trials in humans have been made a punishable offence which would be rare. Wide scope has been left for companies to illegally and unethically deal in all other forms of trials and field-trials have not been dealt in the said act.” According to the definition of “confidential commercial information” in Section 3 of the Act, no person would be able to obtain information from the authority under the RTI too as it will attract the provisions of Section 8 of the RTI Act. The way field trial, clinical trial, commercial information, etc are defined in the bill, only ensures that the Biotechnology Authority remains a useless and cosmetic body which serves the commercial interest of big multinationals only. Unless and until there are strict penal provisions against concealment of adverse effects on humans or environment and severe class action and penal consequences for any genetically modified product which causes harm/damage, the regulatory authority will serve no purpose. Also, the Act must specify, that if the GM products are proven harmful then the penal action against government agencies, corporations on whose recommendations any GM has been cleared.
The Act also attacks the Constitution by undermining the Federal Structure of the Indian polity. “Agriculture and pest control is an exclusive State subject as per Article 246 and VII the Schedule of the Constitution. By inserting Section 2 and 81 in the Biotechnology Act, the Union Government unfairly and illegally wants to take control of all agricultural activities and encroaches on the authority of the States. This is undemocratic and unconstitutional.” Umendra Dutt mentioned.
Renowned social worker Onkar Chand mentioned the casual manner in which the Government is dealing with the BRAI bill is a serious issue of concern as the advent of MNC’s in genetically modified food and products will have the effect of controlling not only the entire food chain by a few people but can also bring in unheard miseries on human beings by ill-researched or greedy actions by these commercial companies. He demanded that the BRAI bill should not even be considered or deliberated upon unless and until the opinion of all the State Governments and the public in general is also taken on it. It should be withdrawn from the parliament immediately.
Dr. Vinod Nanda said that the composition of committee in chapter II of the BRAI Act is also ludicrous and it gives little autonomy to the regulatory authority. “Members in the Bioregulatory authority should be appointed from all the State Governments too and ideally should be much larger body and not just a three member dummy body.”
Various lawyers’ bodies and legal experts mentioned that the bill carries several discrepancies and clearly indicates that it has been drafted by those persons who have substantial interests in biotechnology areas. It was also pointed out that the BRAI Bill will bring the GM issue in the domain of the Ministry of Science and Technology, which has a substantial conflict of interest as it is already partnering with many MNC’s and having joint programs. Most of the scientists in Department of Bio-Technology have cross funding from these big companies. Legal experts were of the opinion that such a regulatory authority should be under the Ministry of Health and not Biotechnology.
For Further Information, Please Contact
Convenor, “
Telephone: (+91) 9872682161
You need to login or register to post comments.
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts)