GM Mustard Crop + India Social Forum and WTO

[Guest guest]

1. DU’s transgenic mustard crop trials may hit roadblock 2. INDIA Social　Forum reviews WTO impact on agriculture ------------------------------- DU’s transgenic mustard crop trials may hit roadblock http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=146298 ASHOK B SHARMA Posted online: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 0018 hours IST NEW DELHI, NOV 12: The Delhi University (DU)’s transgenic mustard crop under limited field trials may have to face difficult times ahead. The petitioners, Aruna Rodrigues and others in the ongoing public interest litigation (PIL) have drawn the attention of the Supreme Court suspecting application of genetic use restriction technologies (GURTs) in the development of the crop. GURTs, otherwise known as terminator technology, produces terminator seeds which do not germinate when saved for the next crop season. The Plant Varieties Protection & Farmers’ Rights Act has banned the registration and use of terminator seeds. The Supreme Court had earlier imposed a ban on fresh approval of any genetically modified (GM) crops for field trials till further orders. However, on October 13, 2006 it made a case of exception by allowing contained field trials of GM mustard, DMH-11 developed by the Delhi University. The Delhi University had assured to follow all biosafety norms and agreed to uproot the crop if the apex court passes such a ruling in future on account of failure to adhere to necessary precautions. Aruna Rodrigues and others, who had earlier filed a PIL urging for a moratorium on GM crops, have now drawn the attention of the apex court citing health and

environmental hazards relating to the GM mustard crop. Seed Effect • Aruna Rodrigues and others in the PIL have drawn the attention of the SC suspecting application of GURTs in the development of the crop• GURTs produces terminator seeds which do not germinate when saved for the next crop season They cited expert evidences put forth by three leading international specialists namely, Doug Gurian-Sherman of the Centre for Food Safety, Washington; Jack Heinemann, director, Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety in the University of Canterbury and Joe Cummins, professor-emeritus of genetics in the University of Western Ontario. The petitioners have claimed that the Delhi University has suppressed facts about its GM mustard crop, DMH-11. They have said that DMH-11 is not identical to the developed and trial tested Ms8/Rf3 (GM canola crops) in Europe, the US, Canada and Australia as claimed

by the Delhi University. Aruna Rodrigues and others in their affidavit have said that barnase-barstar mutations in DHM-11 mustard may be GURTs. “The data in the IA is incomplete. It is not known whether this particular Barnase-Barstar system in the GM mustard is intended to be used as a GURT, which forces the farmer to buy new seed in every planting season or as a tool for making hybrids.” Mustard or Brassica juncea is an open pollinating crop which out-crosses pretty well and hence there is a danger of pollen flow from DMH-11 to other crops or wild relatives. The regulator, Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), is deeply concerned over the developments. There are reports of local farmers under the leadership of Bharatiya Kissan Union (BKU) burning Bt rice under field trials in Karnal, Haryana. The BKU has said that the field trial was

conducted without the prior knowledge of the state government, district authorities and panchayats.-- Social forum reviews WTO impact on global farm crisis http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=146302 ASHOK B SHARMA Posted online: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 0027 hours IST NEW DELHI, NOV 12: Farmers’ distress and adverse impact of the present global trade regime on agriculture in the developing countries were among the major issues deliberated at the 5-day meeting of the India Social Forum (ISF) in New Delhi. Negotiations on agriculture at the WTO has been a contentious issue. The suspension of the Doha Development Round of negotiations in July, this year was primarily due to agriculture as the

major trading partners - the EU and the US - failed to narrow down their differences on the issue of ensuring fair trading practices by reducing the protection to their farm sector and opening up of their markets. The derailment of the Cancun negotiations in 2003, was occasioned by the opposition of a large number of developing countries to the introduction of Singapore issues (rules on competition policy, investment, trade facilitation and government procurement). But the confrontation had begun with ganging up of developing and the least developed countries on the issue of the proposed farm negotiations. Agriculture, therefore, continues to be the central issue in determining the fate of not only the Doha Development Round but also of WTO. Negotiations on agriculture has united the South against the North said the former India’s representative to GATT, SP Shukla. Shukla, who retired as the country's finance

secretary, is now the convenor of Indian People’s Campaign Against WTO (IPCAWTO). Apart from several civil society organisations, there was a good participation by a number of farmers' organisations like Bharat Krishak Samaj, Shetkari Sangathan and International Collective in Support of Fishworkers. Farmers' leaders raised the issue of unabted rates in peasant suicides and adverse impact of the market economy and unfair global trade practices. It has suggested to the Indian government to take opportunity provided by the present collapse of the negotiations to harden its stand. It said that India should insist on the right to impose quantitative restrictions on imports of agricultural products. And demand exclusion of forestry, fishery and mining from non-agricultural market access category in view of the livelihood implications for the vulnerable sections . It also said

that India should not accept universal bindings and deep tariff cuts on industrial goods and should drastically revise its offers in the GATS negotiations and defeat the moves of the developed countries to circumscribe the area of domestic regulations. India should also take steps to revive the demand for the review of TRIPS to make it consistent with the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and insist on general public licence in software and biotechnology. ICPAWTO suggested that India take the initiative for a grouping of the Third World countries for formulating and agreement on trade and co-operation in agriculture, which would mark a paradigm shift from the present WTO agenda. It alleged that the present WTO agenda being biased in favour of temperate zone, mechanized largescale agri-business driven trade-oriented intensive farming. The new paradigm shift should be for ensuring peasant-centric, food sovereignty and livelihood security

farming. Shukla said, “An agrarian crisis is already gripping the Third World. If trade majors coerce the resumption of the suspended talks through some cosmetic moves in agriculture to take on board Brazil and India, the crisis will only deepen, the political and social consequences of which are incalculable. Even those governments in the Third World that would seek comfort in some inadequate and ineffective caveats like special products and special safeguard mechanisms will eventually find the ground swell of unmanageable peasant discontent.”