SC defers hearing on Centre’s plea, says environmental harm cannot be ‘reversed’

New Delhi: With the Supreme Court deferring the consideration of the Centre’s plea for the withdrawal of an oral undertaking made to the top court over GM mustard in November last, it seems the fate of commercial release of genetically modified (GM) mustard hangs in balance as the apex court has observed that environmental harm cannot be ‘reversed’.

While cautioning the government to not ‘release anything’, a bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan deferred the matter to September 26.

In its plea, the Centre said either it be discharged from the oral undertaking of November 2022 or, alternatively, the government be permitted to sow GM seeds this season at eight sites where seeds were sown in the last season.

While appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, “If the court discharges us from our undertaking, then we can proceed to sow the mustard seeds at the ten sites initially proposed and carry out the research. This court, while deciding this matter, will also have the benefit of our reports.”

Bhati, who had made the November undertaking, further stressed that the government did not want to lose another sowing season. “Alternatively, at least, allow the government to sow the seeds at eight sites and place the report before this court,” she said.

The court, however, sought to remind her how difficult it was to undo the harm caused to environment.

“One year here or there does not matter. This is only one season. Next year there will be another season. However, environmental harm cannot be reversed. We will have to hear the application and consider it,” the bench said, while deferring the plea for hearing on September 26.

At the outset, the ASG referred to the circumstances under which the oral undertaking was made on behalf of the Centre.

The seeds were already sown in eight out of 10 sites when the apex court asked the Centre not to take any “precipitative action” as the case was to be listed for final hearing in November, 2022.

“The next sowing season was also one year away. This undertaking was made under these circumstances. We are at the last phase of research. This is not a commercial release, but an environmental release,” she said.

While appearing for activist Aruna Rodrigues, lawyer Prashant Bhushan objected to the submissions by the Centre and said that the environmental release of GM mustard may lead to contamination of non-genetically modified crops and no open-field trial should be allowed.

Earlier, the top court had sought the response of NGO ‘Gene Campaign’ and others on the Centre’s plea seeking withdrawal of its oral undertaking.

On November 3, 2022, the top court had ordered status quo on the decision of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) to approve GM Mustard for commercial cultivation.

It had asked the government to ensure that “no precipitative action” is taken until an application filed before it on the issue has been heard.

The top court had earlier observed it was more concerned about the risk factors than anything else when it comes to the conditional approval granted by the Centre for environmental release of GM mustard.

On October 25 last year, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) under the Union environment ministry had approved the environmental release of transgenic mustard hybrid DMH-11 and the parental lines containing barnase, barstar and bar genes so they can be used for developing new hybrids.