In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India has greenlit Monsanto Technology’s patent claim on its genetically-modified (GM) cotton seeds. This decision truly revolutionizes the arena of seed technology, with Monsanto — now a subsidiary of German firm Bayer AG — triumphing over a preceding Delhi High Court decree from 2018. The earlier verdict had declared Monsanto’s patent invalid. It was argued that the gene responsible for the Bt trait, which eliminates pests in cotton plants, forms part of the seed and thus, cannot be patented under Section 3(j) of the Patents Act, 1970.
Rulings: A Backgrounder
The recent Supreme Court ruling also rejects another previous order by the division bench of the Delhi high court, stating that plant varieties and seeds were not eligible to be patented under Indian law by corporate entities. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Ltd (MMB), which retails the GM cotton seeds to more than 40 Indian seed companies under a license, charges these companies a “trait fee”. This fee is sanctioned by the government.
Impact Analysis: Positives
This ruling gives significant impetus to foreign agricultural companies such as Monsanto, Bayer, Dupont, Pioneer, and Syngenta, who were apprehensive of losing their patents on GM crops in India. The verdict upholds that patents are essential for invigorating innovation and will incentivize more companies to introduce India-specific innovations. Furthermore, it is envisaged that the ruling will stimulate investment in the country’s biotechnology firms.
Impact Analysis: Negatives
On the flip side, this protracted dispute compelled Monsanto to retract its herbicide-tolerant (HT) seeds from government approval procedures. The hardest hit from this are the Indian farmers who seek superior quality seeds adapted to withstand both drought and flood conditions, significant factors attributed to global warming. The ambiguity over patent rules has stifled international companies from launching new technology in the Indian market. However, access to sophisticated technology is critical to equip Indian farmers to compete on a global scale. The Bt cotton seed, the only genetically-altered crop permitted in India since 2003, has catapulted India as the world’s foremost cotton producer and its second-largest exporter.
Government’s Stance
The Government of India regulates the prices of GMO seeds and Monsanto’s royalty, which keeps the seeds within affordable limits for Indian farmers. Till recently, organizations such as Nuziveedu were mandated to procure an annual No Objection Certificate (NOC) from Monsanto. The company ensured the right processes were being adhered to, crucial for it to be accountable for any issues with the seeds. However, the government has recently revoked this annual NOC requirement, effectively meaning that if firms opt against paying royalties, Monsanto’s only recourse is to file a civil suit, which could take years to resolve.
| Year | Event |
|---|---|
| 2018 | Delhi High Court invalidated Monsanto’s patent |
| 2021 | Supreme Court overturned Delhi High Court judgement |
| 2003 | Bt cotton seed introduced in India |
| 2021 | Annual NOC requirement by government for seed firms revoked |
Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops
Bollgard II cotton contains two genes, Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab, derived from the common soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). India ratified the Cartagena Protocol designed to safeguard biodiversity from potential risks of genetically modified organisms and the products of modern biotechnology. As per the protocol, a regulatory body is required to be set up. The top biotech regulator presently in India is the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), functioning under the Environment Protection Act 1986 of the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF). The GEAC regulates manufacturing, use, import, export, and storage of hazardous microorganisms or genetically engineered organisms and cells within the country.
Further Regulatory Agencies for GMO
Following the powers conferred by Sections “Regulation of Genome Engineering Technologies in India”, 8 and 25 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, rules have been formulated that cover the entire spectrum of activities involving GMOs. Six Competent Authorities have been notified under these Rules, including rDNA Advisory Committee (RDAC), Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBSC), Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation (RCGM), Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), State Biotechnology Coordination committee (SBCC), District Level Committee (DLC). The RDAC is advisory in nature, while the IBSC, RCGM, and GEAC are responsible for regulation; SBCC and DLC monitor purposes.
