But in the minutes of the meetings of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), the apex regulatory body for GMOs, there is an admission that a gap in the regulatory system needs to be addressed. It has to be decentralized further and state governments need to get actively involved in monitoring these sites.

“The information from the State department does not percolate to the district level and field level functionaries in proper time. The chairman GEAC opined that this gap needs to be addressed on a priority basis and informed the Committee that the matter may be taken up with the respective State governments”.

The Committee went a step ahead and said that large-scale field trials should be conducted with the full knowledge and involvement of Gram Sabha, District Magistrate and Block Development Officer. The issue of technical support to the Gram Sabha by state agriculture universities was also discussed.

Till last year, the Monitoring and Evaluation Committee (MEC) under the Department of Biotechnology was a central body.

“It is physically impossible for this body to go and visit each field in the village. It was decided to involve the state agriculture universities. We have been holding capacity building workshops with them,” said K K Tripathi, member of the Review Committee on Genetic Modified organisms (RCGM) that gives permission for these trials.

Apart from the concerns raised by anti-GM activists, the most immediate issue is the fear expressed by foodgrain exporters. Indian crops, especially Basmati rice, is sold at a premium in EU as India is “GM free”.

... contd.