Gene Campaign v Union of India 2024: Supreme Court Case

The case of Gene Campaign v Union of India (2024) centers around the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee’s (GEAC) approval of genetically modified mustard HT Mustard DMH-11 for commercial cultivation. This approval was granted in October 2022 which faced strong opposition from NGOs and activists through PILs reasoning environmental, health and safety concerns. The matter was then brought before the Supreme Court. Explore other important Landmark Judgements.

Download Gene Campaign v Union of India PDF

The case Gene Campaign v Union of India involves approval of Union Government of HT Mustard DMH-11 which is a genetically modified mustard variety proposed for commercial cultivation as the first transgenic food crop of India. The approval, granted by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) in October 2022, faced strong opposition from non-governmental organizations and activists through public interest litigations (PILs) citing environmental and safety concerns.

Approval of GM Mustard

The Union Government approved the commercial cultivation of genetically modified (GM) mustard, specifically the variety 'HT Mustard DMH-11', which would be India's first transgenic food crop if approved. The Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) functions under Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, granted approval on 18th October 2022.

Public Interest Litigations (PILs)

Non-governmental organizations and activists filed Public Interest Litigations and challenged GEAC decision cited potential risks related to genetically modified organisms especially in open field trials.

Technical Expert Committee (TEC) Report

In 2012 the Supreme Court constituted Technical Expert Committee (TEC) to evaluate GMO regulatory framework of India. The TEC concluded that the regulatory system was in "complete disarray" and needed substantial reforms. Petitioners argued that the GEAC ignored this critical report while making its decision in October 2022, which prompted the Court to express dissatisfaction over the oversight.

Status Quo Ordered by Supreme Court

In November 2022 the Supreme Court ordered Union Government to maintain the status quo effectively halting release of GM mustard .

Government’s Defense

The Centre defended its approval by asserting that the existing bio-safety regime sufficiently addresses all safety concerns. It highlighted that GM mustard offers higher yields compared to non-GM varieties. It also observed that other major agricultural countries have successfully adopted GM crops.

Split Verdict by Supreme Court

On 23rd July 2024 Supreme Court passed split verdict. Justice BV Nagarathna invalidated the approval due to public interest concerns and procedural flaws. Conversely Justice Sanjay Karol upheld the approval.

Referral to Larger Bench

Due to the divergent opinions, the bench referred matter to the Chief Justice to constitute a larger bench for further consideration. The Union Government agreed not to proceed with the implementation of the decision until the issue is resolved.

Gene Campaign v Union of India (2024) Issues addressed

The following issues were addressed in Gene Campaign v Union of India (2024) -

• Whether the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee's (GEAC) approval of 'HT Mustard DMH-11' was procedurally valid and consistent with established regulatory standards.
• Whether the GEAC improperly disregarded the recommendations of the Technical Expert Committee (TEC) report from 2012, which identified flaws in India's GMO regulatory framework.
• Whether the GEAC’s decision violated principles of public interest and intergenerational equity by failing to adequately assess health and environmental impacts.
  Whether judicial review of GEAC’s approval is permissible given the implications for health, environment, and regulatory compliance.

A 2-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Sanjay Karol in Gene Campaign v Union of India (2024) considered that judicial review of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) decision is permissible. 

The Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Sanjay Karol ordered the Union Government to formulate a national policy on genetically modified (GM) crops through a comprehensive consultation process involving all stakeholders including states and farmers groups within four months.

The Supreme Court in Gene Campaign v Union of India instructed Ministry of Environment and Forests to conduct this national consultation and emphasized that the Union must ensure a thorough verification of experts' credentials and prevent conflicts of interest, with appropriate rules established to enforce these standards. Additionally, the Court mandated that the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) Act be applied in matters related to the import of GM food.

Justice BV Nagarathna invalidated the GEAC's approval dated 18th October 2022 and the subsequent decision of 25th October 2022 for the environmental release of transgenic mustard. She held that the approval process violated principles of public interest, intergenerational equity and public trust. According to her GEAC acted hastily, ignoring crucial aspects such as the potential impact on health and the environment. Justice Nagarathna criticized the GEAC for disregarding the Technical Expert Committee's (TEC) report, which undermined the Court’s earlier directives.

Conversely Justice Sanjay Karol in Gene Campaign v Union of India upheld the GEAC's approval, arguing that it complied with the government's approach to promoting scientific advancement. He noted that procedural flaws alone do not necessarily infringe upon fundamental rights. Justice Karol stressed that GEAC conditional approval for field trials was consistent with efforts to foster scientific progress provided that the Union Government ensures strict monitoring and safeguards against contamination during testing.

Due to the conflicting opinions, the Bench referred the matter Gene Campaign v Union of India to Chief Justice of India to constitute larger bench for a fresh hearing. The Union Government agreed not to proceed with the implementation of the decision until the larger bench delivers its judgment.

Conclusion

In Gene Campaign v Union of India (2024) split verdict of the Supreme Court reflects the complex balance between promoting scientific progress and ensuring environmental safety and public interest. With Justice Nagarathna invalidating the GEAC’s approval for procedural flaws and Justice Karol supporting the government's approach to scientific development, the case has been referred to a larger bench for further deliberation, postponing the implementation of the decision.