Tag Archives: Field Trials

TECHNICAL EXPERT COMMITTEE REPORT SCIENTIFIC AND SENSIBLE: FARMER UNIONS AND COALITION HOPE THAT SUPREME COURT WILL ACCEPT THE INTERIM REPORT IN TOTO

Posted on by
Reply

On the eve of the Supreme Court Hearing in the PIL related to GMOs (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2005, by Aruna Rodrigues and ors) which is to look into the interim report of the Technical Expert Committee appointed by the Court, the Coalition for a GM-Free India condemned the attempts by the industry, media and a couple of MNC-supportedfarmers’ outfits to lobby heavily against the TEC report. The Coalition urged the learned Bench to accept the TEC report and urgently pass appropriate orders to ensure that this risky technology is not deployed unscientifically in our country.

The Coalition said that the Court has rightly appointed a committee consisting of experts nominated by both the petitioners and the respondents and that the TEC did an in-depth inquiry into one of the terms of reference that it picked up before giving its interim report. “We welcome the recommendations and more importantly, they reflect the findings and reiterate the recommendations made by other committees/task force reports as well. The TEC has aptly justified each of its recommendations after studying the challenges posed by this living technology as well as the pathetic state of regulatory affairs in the country, which reeks of apathy, incompetence in biosafety assessment, inability to monitor GM crops trials, conflict of interest, lack of rationale while processing applications, and most importantly, allowing unnecessary experimentation when other solutions exist”, said Sridhar Radhakrishnan, Convenor of the Coalition for a GM-Free India.

Rakesh Tikait, leader of Bharatiya Kisan Union, stated, “We welcome the report of the Technical Expert Committee of the Supreme Court recommending moratorium on field trials of GM crops. We believe that the recommendations are in the interests of the Indian farmer, who is suffering from the onslaught of anti-farmer policies and technologies. We have full confidence that the Supreme Court will take the correct decision accepting the committee’s report.”

“The claim made by some vested groups that this technology has been successful in the USA is ridiculous and unfounded.. The reality is that in the USA, despite and probably because of such technologies, the government is forced to subsidizing its farmers heavily and prop up agriculture to make it viable. If GM technology was so effective why do American farmers require unprecedented levels of governmental support to make agriculture viable? . Further, there is no scientific evidence to claim that there are no GM-related health problems in the US – in fact, there have been increased food-related health problems in the US during the same period when GM foods have become part of their diet. It should also be kept in mind that a vast majority of GM produce in the US goes into livestock feed, industrial use and bio-fuel production. The environmental (and related health) problems with increased use of chemicals like herbicides, linked to GM crop cultivation, in the USA and South American nations is well-documented – superweeds and superpests have become serious threats and there is much scientific literature on the same. We do not need such hazardous technologies in our farming here”, said Kannaiyan Subramanian, Convenor of South Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers’ Movements. He added that there has been strong opposition from farmer organizations to the introduction of GM food crops, as extensively expressed during the public hearings on Bt Brinjal, and as stated publicly by many key farmer unions – both non-party and party-affiliated. He condemned the attempts by certain MNC-backed farmer outfits to claim that Indian farmers require GM crops.

The Coalition condemned the attempts by some groups to paint the TEC as unscientific and for claiming that this is the end of scientific research in India. It pointed out that this is misleading since the TEC was not talking about all of biotechnology but only transgenics, that too in crops, which is a minor part of “biotechnology” . However this tool has gained undue interest essentially because it allows for easier IPR controls for the industry/MNCs and thereby, market monopolies.

The Coalition pointed out that pest control without the use of pesticides (the ostensible reason for which Bt crops are promoted, incidentally by the same companies which have given us pesticides, claiming them to be safe) is indeed possible without resorting to Bt technology and the TEC is right in stressing that field trials should be need-based. It is also true that Bt crops have showed up their true colors where they have been deployed –negative animal and human health problems have gone uninvestigated despite ground level reports, the resistance in target pests, the lack of reduction in the volumes or cost of chemical pesticides consumed in the country even after 10 years of Bt cotton, adverse changes in pest and disease ecology etc., are all well-documented.

The Coalition pointed out to the Court that what the TEC is recommending is not something new; the recommendation by a Task Force headed by Dr Swaminathan in 2003 ( accepted by the government of India) had clearly stated that the transgenic option is to be used only when alternatives are unavailable or not feasible. The Task Force also recommended the same for to the introduction of Herbicide Tolerant Crops and crops for which we are the Centre of Origin/Diversity. These have been cautioned against by others inquiring into the matter of GMOs in India too.

Further, what the Committee pointed out as serious biosafety issues with Bt cotton and Bt brinjal are issues that have been raised by respected independent scientists from the world over who studied the biosafety dossiers of these GMOs. The TEC has rightly pointed out to the same problems as the other experts have.

The fact that India has indiscriminately allowed field trials without any rationale for locations, without any ability for proper ‘containment’ to prevent contamination (on which the SC has already passed on order expressly asking for no contamination from field trials), without any biosafety review, without a system for monitoring field trials, without a scientific, rigorous, independent and sequential process for risk assessment etc., were all appropriately pointed out by the TEC. The TEC was also correct in pointing us all to India’s international commitments including the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol.

The Coalition hoped that the Supreme Court will now accept the interim report and ensure that no risk emerges from field trials of untested, new organisms especially in all those cases where such research is unneeded in the first instance.

For clarifications

Sridhar Radhakrishnan – 09995358205

Kavitha Kuruganthi – 09393001550

Kannaiyyan Subramanian – 09444989543

Coalition condemns Biotech industry attempts to hijack and dilute the CBD MOP6 discussions

Posted on by
Reply

MOP exposes real safety concerns of GM crops;
Coalition demands that India should not allow any open-air field trials or release of GM crops.
A comprehensive Biosafety Law be enacted with strict liability and redress provisions.

The CBD MOP6, has for once, exposed the Global Biotech industry’s attempts to sabotage the Supplementary Protocol by attempting to discourage and dissuade parties from ratifying it and instead lobbying nations to adopt the industry sponsored voluntary compensation mechanism under the Compact. This follows years of attempts by the Global (and Indian) industry led by Monsanto to assert the supposed safety of genetically modified (GM) crops. The Coalition also deplores the attempts of many members of the agricultural research establishment, both national and international, for toeing the industry line and trying hard to dismiss the real concerns raised by civil society and independent scientists across the world. The CBD-MOP6 discussions and the various side events exposed these lies in the full glare of public attention. The dangers of GM crops to health, environment and biodiversity occupied centre-stage – as policy-makers, scientists and activists from 193 countries spent 5 days discussing how to ensure bio-safety while dealing with this highly risky technology. The false propaganda of the industry regarding Bt cotton was also exposed in front of the international media during an industry-sponsored field trip. The Bt cotton farmers spoke about bollworm attack and other pest attacks, increased use of pesticides and low yields.

The Coalition urges the Government of India to take decisions on this technology, assigning the highest priority to biosafety and to applying the Precautionary Principle, instead of being led by false propaganda from the industry. It reminds the government of the Bt Brinjal moratorium and the events that led to it, the continuing disaster afflicting farmers’ lives by Bt Cotton, and the violations of biosafety happening across the country during various field trials of GM crops. The Indian government has announced that it will ratify the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress, and urged all countries to do the same. So far, 51 countries have signed this protocol, and the ratifications have just begun. This stand from the Indian government should be welcomed. However ratifying is only the first step – the crux is in implementation.

“The CBD MOP6 may have concluded, but the real work now has to begin at home.” said Shalini Bhutani, a lawyer working on law and policy issues around agriculture. “Decisions taken at the global level need to be followed through at the national level. This is particularly true with respect to designing a liability and redress (L+R) law for LMOs. The Supplementary Protocol on L+R requires countries to provide for L+R with respect to LMOs in their domestic laws.” She warned against letting the TNC-designed ‘Compact’ from pre-empting any legislative measures by countries on this critical subject.

“We are disappointed with the reluctance of the government to adopt a Biosafety Protection Law. Besides spending hundreds of crores in organizing the CBD COP & MOP, India is taking over the presiding role in the Convention on Biological Diversity for the next two years. It must therefore show real commitment to biodiversity conservation. It should fulfill its minimum responsibility to enact a National Biosafety Act which ensures practical implementation of all the commitments under the various Protocols that it is ratifying. It should immediately ban all field trials of GM crops, as strongly recommended by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture” said Sridhar Radhakrishnan, Convener, Coalition for GM Free India.

Amongst the 18 decisions adopted at the MOP6, the decision to establish an ad-hoc technical expert group (AHTEG) on socio-economic considerations is of particular interest to India. “We welcome the fact that socio-economic considerations have been given recognition by forming a Technical Group of 40 representatives to thoroughly examine the socio-economic implications of GM crops.” added Kiran Kumar Vissa, Convener, Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA). “As we have always argued, GM crops should be looked at not only through the lens of technology but its socio-economic consequences should be seriously examined – including issues of impact on small farmers, their control and access to seed, impact on the costs and risks of cultivation, corporate control of seed sector, implications of proprietary rights over life forms, etc.” he said. This process should be truly participatory with proper representation of farmers’ organizations and civil society groups. Countries like the US have stayed resistant to this as they approach LMOs merely as a trade issue. “In a country like India the lives and livelihoods of several thousand people, especially tribal and local communities and small-marginal farmers, have to be considered when taking decisions about any application of potentially hazardous technologies. Infact, the safer alternatives that have now been clearly demonstrated through organic farming, non-pesticidal management etc, have to be considered before opting for this unnecessary risk of GM crops” said Dr Ramanjaneyelu, Director, Centre for Sustainable Agriculture.

Another substantive issue which arose from the Programme of Work of the COP-MOP and previous decisions is regarding developing guidance for parties on risk assessment. India’s claim to have established a mechanism for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs is unacceptable, as the real experience on the ground and submissions in the ongoing PIL in the Supreme Court have pointed to the egregious gaps in the regulatory regime in India, which will need to be addressed.

It is deplorable that some European nations also showed great resistance to the requirement of “Identification” where any package containing Living Modified Organism(LMO) will be clearly identified for handling and transport. This shows the hypocrisy and manipulation by these governments backed by the biotech industry; having acknowledged the risks of Living Modified Organisms and evolving an entire Protocol for biosafety, identification and labeling of LMOs should be the very first step.

The MOP6 also saw the continuing influence of big biotech industry lobby spending millions of dollars to be present in the Convention simply to weaken the protocols, the continuing influence from strong non-parties like the US and the resistance from some European countries in strengthening the implementation of the protocol, the delay in most countries in ratifying the protocols, the lack of sufficient budget for capacity-building and ensuring the implementation of the protocols in the member countries after ratification. The Coalition calls for all countries to ratify the Supplementary Protocol and, implement strict biosafey laws. The Coalition also raised serious concerns about the apathy among global leader nations to contribute towards ensuring adequate financial resources for the implementation of the world’s biosafety protocols and decisions related to them.

What Indian national and state governments should do

We demand that the Indian national and state governments should treat the CBD conference and the MOP6 as the beginning of a new phase where Bio-safety will be given highest priority while dealing with GM crops.

Specific demands:
(1) Indian government should enact a comprehensive National Biosafety Protection Law to address the risks posed by Genetic Engineering technology. Any future consideration of release of GM crops should be only after such a biosafety regime based on precautionary principles, complete consideration of socio-economic realities and strict liability and redress is implemented. The Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India(BRAI) bill should be discarded completely, as it violates the key commitments being made by India under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and its Supplementary Protocol.
(2) All open-air field trials of GM crops constitute an “environmental release”, and should be stopped forthwith, as recommended by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture.
(3) No GM research and development should be allowed on crops in their centre of diversity, especially for important food crops. This applies to rice, brinjal, jowar, red gram, brinjal and so on. Indian diploid (desi) cotton varieties should be protected from GM, and non-GM development should be taken up.
(4) Comprehensive process to assess the socio-economic implications of GM crops should be initiated in India, in light of the formation of the Technical Expert Group in MOP6.
(5) The Department of Biotechnology and its association with Biotechnology Consortium India Limited (BCIL) should immediately stop funding and facilitating the development of this risky technology of GM crops and focus more on capacity-building about the risks of the technology.

Sridhar Radhakrishnan, Convener, Coalition for GM Free India: 09995358205, mail.thanal@gmail.com
Dr. G.V. Ramanjaneyulu, Centre for Sustainable Agriculture: 09000699702, ramoo.csa@gmail.com
Kirankumar Vissa, co-convenor, Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA): 09701705743, kiranvissa@gmail.com

PRESS RELEASE PUT OUT BY THE COALITION FOR A GM-FREE INDIA, ON OCTOBER 6TH 2012

(Rajasthan) Government bans GM trials, to burn standing crop

Posted on by
Reply

The Rajasthan government has put on hold all trials of genetically modified (GM) crops in the state.

In an order dated 13 March, the Principal Secretary, Agriculture, government of Rajasthan stated “..no trials of GM crops should be conducted in the State until final decision in this matter is taken.”

“The issue (of permitting trials of transgenic crops) indeed being fraught with concerns as no unanimity has arrived at, either in their favour or against them. The government, after considering different aspects of it, has taken a view to wait until a national consensus is evolved. It has also been decided that discussions should be held with all stakeholders and to form a view in this regard keeping in mind the guidelines issued by GEAC and GoI,” the order said.

Significantly, the order comes close on heels of the government’s withdrawal of the controversial no-objection certificate (NoC) recently issued by it to the Delhi University for conduct of GM mustard trials in three locations in Rajasthan. The trials had started in Bharatpur, Alwar and Sriganganagar and were nearing harvest. Responding to media reports and questions raised in the assembly, the government had ordered that the NoC be withdrawn. “On March 9th, the NoC was withdrawn and the crop ordered to be destroyed,” confirmed Anil Gupta, deputy secretary, department of agriculture.

So far, international seed majors Monsanto, Dow Agro Sciences and Pioneer have applied for and got permission from the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) under the centre to conduct trials of Ht/Bt Corn in Rajasthan this year, but this was subject to a mandatory no-objection certificate from the state government. With the state’s recent decision not to permit GM trials for now, the trials planned by these companies in the coming season hangs fire.

The order, for the first time, sends a strong signal that Rajasthan is not up to indiscriminately permitting trials of transgenic crops having questionable environmental consequences, without an informed debate. So far, Chattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Kerala, Odisha and Karnataka have said an outright ‘ no’ to GM crop trials in their respective states, while Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Maharashtra have not yet issued NoCs.

Earlier, GM crop experiments were approved directly by the GEAC under the central govenrment. However, state NoCs became mandatory since July 2011 after Nitish Kumar objected to GM trials taking in Bihar without the state government’s consent, as agriculture is a state subject.

Story by Sowmya Sivakumar, Jaipur edition, DNA dated 20th March 2012

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epapermain.aspx?pgNo=2&edcode=1310016&eddate=2012-3-20

 

 

Coalition’s Letter to GEAC about Gujarat Field Trials

Posted on by
Reply

February 28, 2012

To:

Shri M F Farooqui,

Chairperson,

Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee,

Ministry of Environment & Forests,

Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex,

Lodhi Road, New Delhi 3.

 

Dear Shri Farooqui,

Sub: Field Trials of GM Crops in Gujarat violative of EPA 1989 rules

It has come to light through responses to RTI queries that the GM crop field trials that are taking place in the state of Gujarat are violative of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act , Rules (1989 ). As you are aware, as per the 1989 Rules the State Biotechnology Coordination Committee (SBCC) is supposed to be the state-level implementation arm of the GEAC .

However, when asked about the SBCC in an RTI application, the Forests and Environment Department responded by saying that the Agriculture and Cooperation department is the nodal department in the case of Gujarat vide notification no. EPN-1099-GOI-64-P (Part-II) dated 4th February 2004, while the Agriculture Department responded first by saying that it pertains to the Forest & Environment Department, and later amended that the work of SBCC meeting is not being done by this (Agriculture & Cooperation) department.

This clearly violates the provisions of the 1989 Rules and thereby the GM crop field trials taking place in Gujarat are illegal. This is dangerous and particularly so in a situation where violations by companies during GM crop field trials have become rampant in different states. In the recent past two instances of violations were notified to GEAC. Field trials taking place without adequate biosafety oversight is a serious threat to biodiversity and could lead to contamination and other problems. The possibility of contamination has been most recently experienced in India,  with the ICAR/UAS Bt cotton Bikaneri Narma incident, where this Bt cotton was found to be contaminated by a Monsanto Bt gene.

Violation during field trials is not the only problem, particularly with respect to Gujarat. The state has the unfortunate distinction of being the origin of illegal GM cotton planting incidents. Both times, with Bt cotton and recently with BT/HT cotton, illegal plantings have been reported to have originated from Gujarat. In this context it is doubly unsafe to allow GM crop field trials in the state without proper oversight as envisaged in the EPA 1989 rules.

In view of this we seek that all GM crop field trials in Gujarat be stopped with immediate effect.

Expecting your response and necessary action

Thanking You

Yours truly,

Sridhar Radhakrishnan

Convener, Coalition for a GM-Free India,

H-3, Jawahar Nagar, Kawdiar,

Trivandrum-695003, Kerala.

 

 

 

CC : Smt.Jayanthi Natarajan, Minister for Environment & Forests

 

Attachment: RTI responses from Gujarat. ( http://indiagminfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Guj-GM-field-trials-RTI-info-illegal.pdf )

 

 

 

 

Sharad Pawar reiterates State Govts authority….

Posted on by
Reply

In a letter to the Chattisgarh Agriculture Minister Mr Chandrasekhar Sahu, Sharad Pawar, Union Agriculture Minister reiterates that if the state government does not agree for conduct of any GM crop field trials in the State, no approvals would be accorded by GEAC for such trials (However, this is not quite the case now since GM maize and GM mustard trials were approved for Madhya Pradesh even after the state government wrote to the Centre against such trials, for example).

This information was obtained under Right To Information Act. A copy of the letter is available here.

Madhya Pradesh opposes Biotech Regulatory Bill

Posted on by
Reply

You can download Dr Ramakrishna Kusmariya’s letter to Mr Vilasrao Deshmukh here.

Madhya Pradesh opposes Biotech Regulatory Bill

Madhya Pradesh has decided to officially oppose the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) Bill, to be tabled in the Parliament on Tuesday.

State Agriculture Minister Ramkrishna Kusmaria has written to Union Science and Technology Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh, stating Madhya Pradesh’s opposition to some key provisions of Bill.

“States have a Constitutional right to decide on the subjects of health and agriculture. The BRAI Bill, regarding which I have drawn the Centre’s attention earlier, violates this right thereby compromising the States’ autonomy,” Dr. Kusmaria has said in his letter to Mr. Deshmukh.

Dr. Kusmaria has also pointed out that genetic modification of crops was a dangerous technology, the safety of which had yet to be established.

“Indian farmers will get dependent on GM seeds and eventually the entire indigenous agriculture will fall under the control of a few international corporations,” the Minister has written.

It is for these reasons, Dr. Kusmaria has written, that the Madhya Pradesh government registers its strong protest against the BRAI Bill and the proposed field trials of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the State.

The BRAI Bill reportedly has certain controversial provisions against which several States, including Kerala and Orissa, have registered their protests.

Eleven former Supreme Court judges, including former Chief Justice of India Justice M.H. Kania, have also issued a “statement of concern” on the BRAI Bill.

Farm & Food Activists Demand Scrapping of BRAI Bill 2011

Posted on by
Reply

FARM & FOOD ACTIVISTS DEMAND SCRAPPING OF BRAI BILL 2011: Ask State Govt to raise its voice against the Bill and protect farmers’ interests – Seek disallowing of GM crop field trials in the state

Chennai, November 11, 2011: Farmers’ leaders from all over Tamil Nadu, cutting across various affiliations, demanded that the Union Government should scrap the BRAI (Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India) Bill 2011, stating that it was a deeply flawed Bill. They asked the state government of Tamil Nadu to assert its constitutional authority over Agriculture, which this Bill seeks to violate. Farm activists wanted the state government and all TN Members of Parliament to raise objections against the BRAI Bill’s introduction in the winter session. They also urged the state government to ensure that no open-air field trials of GM crops are allowed in Tamil Nadu.

“The BRAI Bill is clearly against the interests of farmers and consumers and seeks to create a single-window fast-track clearance system for profit-hungry corporations. This is a Bill that is unconstitutional and undemocratic. It seeks to bypass the Right To Information Act in its intent to uphold the commercial interests of seed companies. The state government will not be allowed to have any say in the matter and this is clearly a violation of the federal polity enshrined in the Indian Constitution, wherein Agriculture is a State Subject”, said Sridhar Radhakrishnan of the Coalition for a GM-Free India.

Speaking at the end of a Round Table on BRAI Bill, Vettavalam Manikandan of Tamizhaga Vyavasayigal Sangam said, “The state government in recent months has taken the progressive steps of repealing the TNSAC Act and withdrawing a budgetary provision to promote Bt cotton in the state. The CM has also reminded in the National Development Council meeting that Agriculture is after all a State subject. In the same spirit, we hope the CM will write to the Centre to stop this draconian Bill”, he said.

Vellaiyan of Tamil Nadu Vanigar Sangam said that the BRAI Bill is against the bottomline for regulatory regime recommended by a Task Force on Agricultural Biotechnology which had mooted the idea of an independent regulator in the first instance! The bottomline was stated to be “the safety of the environment, the well being of farming families, the ecological and economic sustainability of farming systems, the health and nutrition security of consumers, safeguarding of home and external trade and the biosecurity of the nation. We need a biosafety protection statute and not BRAI”, he asserted.

“We would like the government to make the Tamil Nadu Agriculture University accountable to it and the farming communities in the state; very often, the TNAU is seen to be acting in the interests of profiteering corporations in the way they promote GM technology and take up numerous trials, despite enormous scientific evidence proving the dangers of transgenic technology. We know that in the case of the ABSP II project for the development of Bt brinjal varieties, several legal provisions have been violated and the National Biodiversity Authority has decided to proceed against the violators; an investigation is needed into TNAU’s partnerships with various corporations too”, said Sheelu Francis of Tamil Nadu Women’s Collective.

Dr V Suresh, National Secretary of PUCL said that the BRAI Bill is against our Constitution. It is a part of the twenty first century global effort to colonise Indian agriculture by making food as a primary weapon and hand over our agriculture and food systems to profiteering corporations, thereby affecting our food sovereignty and food self sufficiency carefully built over sixty years of independent India.

“Tamil Nadu’s farmers have pioneered organic farming in the entire country; however, this organic farming movement in the state is being jeopardized now, because the state government is yet to take a firm stand against GMOs in general and BRAI Bill in particular, and given that GM technology is diametrically opposite in its approach and results, to organic farming! We urge the state government to come up with an organic farming policy for the state and stop the onslaught of GM on our farmers here, since we have safer and sustainable technologies to offer. We urge the government to not give any permission for open air field trials in the state, given that the GM technology is a living, imprecise, irreversible and unpredictable technology”, said Selvam Ramaswamy of Tamil Nadu Organic Farmers Federation. He cited the example of several other states that have said NO to field trials.

Sharing the findings of a report she compiled on “A Decade of Bt cotton in Tamil Nadu” on the occasion, Kavitha Kuruganti of ASHA (Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture” pointed out that official records point out that yields of cotton have been fluctuating in the state despite major expansion of Bt cotton in the cotton cultivation in Tamil Nadu, that insecticide usage has not come down as predicted, that cost on pesticides was quite low to begin with, bringing to question the very rationale for the introduction of Bt technology in the state, that cost of cultivation has no declining trends to exhibit etc. “While this is not based on any primary study, the report is based on official figures; this data hopefully will guide the state government in not being misled by the massive publicity that the biotech industry generates by spending its resources and hopefully, the Chief Minister will see the real picture for what it is”, she said.

The Round Table brought out a declaration rejecting the BRAI Bill 2011 in toto. Further, a Joint Action Forum was created consisting of eight prominent people’s leaders. Many other prominent persons like Duraimanickam of CPI-affiliated farmers’ union, Ananthoo of Safe Food Alliance, Thooran Nambi, Ramasubramanian of Samanvaya, Jayaraman of FEDCOT, Dr Tirunarayanan from Centre from Traditional Medicine & Research, Padam Narayanan, Sundar of SJM, KM Ramasamy, non-political Tamizhaga Vyavasayigal Sangam, Eswaran of MDMK, N K Palaniswamy, ex-MLA, Kannaiyan S of SICCFM etc. joined the Round Table here in Chennai.

For more information, contact:

Ananthoo, Safe Food Alliance: 09444166779, ananthoo@gmail.com

Selvam, TN Organic Farmers’ Federation: 09443663562, organicerode@gmail.com

Bt Cotton report released on the occasion