[Greenlist] Fwd: Open Letter on GE Crops: Why is the 'Custodian' of India's biodiversity supporting an anti-conservation agenda?

[Bodi Satva]

Background Note:

Many of you may have seen the news reports of Prof
Kannaiyan, the  Chairperson of National Biodiversity
Authority going around  promoting GE crops as the only
 olution, denouncing NGOs as ignorant  and with
ulterior motives etc.  This is a very arrogant and
offending statement, which is totally  unacceptable.
To condemn this rresponsible and unacceptable
behaviour from  the "custodian" of  ndia's 
iodiversity, so to speak, there is an  open letter
drafted by many groups which will be released  n 25th 
(the day after) to the media. PLEASE ENDORSE THE
LETTER by writing to  
"Kavitha Kuruganti" < kavitha.kuruganti@ gmail.com>
and 
"Mashqura" < mashqura at gmail. com>, 
Thanks.

Umendra Dutt

OPEN LETTER TO CHAIRMAN NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY
AUTHORITY

WHY IS THE "CUSTODIAN" OF INDIA'S BIODIVERSITY
SUPPORTING AN ANTI-
CONSERVATION AGENDA?

To
Dr. S. Kannaiyan
Chairman
National Biodiversity Authority
Chennai
23rd January 2008

Subject: Immediate withdrawal of highly biased and
anti conservation  public statements supporting 
enetic Engineering (GE) and invoking  Section 36.4
(ii) of the Biological Diversity Act

Sir,

It is with deep shock that we read of your comments
made at the  National Seminar on Biodiversity,
Bioresources and Biotechnology for  Sustainable
Livelihood of the Rural Community held at Chennai last

week. Several newspapers have quoted you saying that
"
genetically  modified crops were the only answer to
increase the production and  productivity and to solve
malnutrition problem in the country", and  that "I am
surprised to note that many non-governmental 
organizations are shouting from rooftops against the
introduction of  GM crops. They are either ignorant
about the ground realities or  have some ulterior
motive". 

We are even more concerned that these comments have
been made by you  in your official capacity as the
Chairperson of the National  Biodiversity Authority
which has a critical role in conservation of 
biological diversity and protection of people's
resources and  knowledge to feed and heal themselves
in ecologically benign and  culturally appropriate
ways. 

We would like to draw your attention to the very
provision of the  Biological Diversity Act itself
which acknowledges the potential  hazards of
genetically modified organisms:
Section 36.4 (ii) of the Biological Diversity Act
2002, states that:
`The Central Government shall undertake measures to
regulate, manage  or control the risks associated with
the use and release of living  modified organisms
resulting from biotechnology likely to have  adverse
impact on the conservation and sustainable use of
biological  diversity and human health'.

As one of the key custodians of this law you ought to
be advising  the Central Government on prevention of
GMOs as a precautionary  measure rather than risk the
rich and mega-diverse biodiversity of  India and with
it the culture and livelihoods of millions of people. 
Simply put GE (genetic engineering) is antithetical to
diversity. It  not only perpetrates monocultures, but
also unleashes non-tested  unnatural products that
could cause genetic pollution also  compromising the
food sovereignty of our people with increasing 
dependencies on corporate-sponsored "science". If it
is the promotion of GE that is on the agenda of the
apex body whose role is for the conservation and
sustainable use; then it does not leave communities
and peoples movements with much faith in the
institution. It is not clear by what authority, in
what capacity and with what evidence are you
concluding that GM crops are the only  solution. 

Your statements have also confirmed civil society's
apprehensions in  registering Biodiversity Management
Committees (BMCs) and making  Peoples' Biodiversity
Registers (PBRs). With this approach we feel  that the
network of BMCs will be used to market GM crops into
an  already destroyed farming sector, over riding
existing diversity in  knowledge and resources. 

With your lack of confidence in your own peoples ways
we do not  think you can expect a reciprocal
treatment.

We therefore urge you to:
1. Immediately withdraw your highly biased statements
that are  unscientific and deeply disrespectful of our
peoples' customs,  traditions and practices 
2. Render an apology to all the activists who are
tirelessly  struggling for an objective and
independent assessment of genetic  engineering in
agriculture
3. Immediately invoke the spirit of clause Section
36.4 (ii) and  immediately put a stay on grant of
clearances for field trials and  use of GE crops, as a
precautionary conservation measure.

If the above is not acceptable, kindly resign from the
post of NBA  Chairperson as people have lost their
faith in the office whose bias  is clearly supporting
and safeguarding ideologies which are  inherently
against conservation.

In anticipation,

Sincerely,

Name Organization State
1. Ashish Kothari Kalpavriksh Pune, Maharashtra
2. Devinder Sharma Forum for Biotechnology and Food 
Security New Delhi
3. Kanchi Kohli Kalpavriksh Delhi
4. Kavitha Kuruganti & G V Ramanjaneyulu Centre for 
Sustainable Agriculture Karnataka
5. P.V. Satheesh Deccan Development Society
Andhra Pradesh
6. Shalini Bhutani GRAIN Delhi
7. Sridhar Radhakrishnan Thanal Kerala
8. Bharat Mansata, Earthcare Books
9. 

CC: Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India, New Delhi
Meena Gupta, Secretary, Ministry of Environment and
Forests 
K.Venkatraman, Member Secretary, National Biodiversity

Authority (NBA), 
Chennai
Chairpersons of all State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs)




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ