GM mustard row: Supreme Court will only examine 'judicial aspects'

The next hearing will be on November 29

Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Bhavini MishraSanjeeb Mukhejee New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Nov 17 2022 | 11:00 PM IST
While hearing the plea challenging the sowing of genetically modified mustard in the country, the Supreme Court on Thursday said it will not get into the technical aspects of the case, but examine the judicial part.

The parties informed the bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia that submissions have been filed by all parties concerned after the Centre submitted its affidavit on November 10.

The next hearing will be on November 29.

The counsel for Gene Campaign, a petitioner in the case, said they have made their submissions before the court and said their main concern was that the Technical Expert Committee (TEC) report, which warned about the dire effects of GM mustard, was not read out before the court.

Meanwhile, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for petitioner Aruna Rodrigues, said the approval to GM mustard on October 25 is contrary to TEC report. “We have filed a compilation,” he said.

This comes after the government told the Supreme Court that approval for the “environmental” release of transgenic mustard hybrid DMH-11 has been given to the Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants (CGMCP) after a long and exhaustive review process, which started in 2010.

The court had told the Centre on November 3 not to allow the planting of genetically modified (GM) mustard until the next hearing.

The Centre had told the court it needed time to put the latest facts on record.

In its 67-page affidavit, the Centre submitted the background of the application given by the CGMCP, the decision-making process of the government, the regulatory framework under which permission was granted to DMH-11, and its scientific and socio-economic importance to the country.

It said conditional approval (of DMH-11) pertained to an environmental release prior to its commercial release and was subject to regulatory and technical oversight. The Centre also in its affidavit said opposition to GM crops was unfounded as India was already importing and consuming oils made from it.

Bhushan had also said the court-appointed TEC had advised against using any herbicide-tolerant crop.

“It also said the regulatory system in India was in a shambles and needed to be revamped,” he said.

He said the shoring up of the system needed at least 10 years.

One subscription. Two world-class reads.

Already subscribed? Log in

Subscribe to read the full story →
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

Topics :GM MustardPrashant BhushanIndian JudiciarySupreme CourtCropGM Mustard cropMustardGM mustard permitHigh court judgesMustard Seed

Next Story