An anti-genetically modified crops activist has asked the Supreme Court to accept the final report of its technical expert committee while "ignoring" any findings by its member and former DG of Indian Council of Agriculture Research R S Paroda, alleging that he had "conflict of interest" on the issue.
The affidavit filed by activist Aruna Rodrigues, who had sought a complete moratorium on field trial of GMO, said the final report and documents by the expert committee (TEC) recommended no field trials till regulatory gaps are addressed as there have been serious shortcomings in the GMO regulatory process.
The affidavit filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan said the TEC in their 'covering letter' to their final report indicated that Paroda was not present to sign it on June 30, 2013, nor did he give a dissenting note.
Further, it said TEC enclosed Paroda's contribution separately. "That document enclosed with the Report shows that the overall conclusion of his (Paroda's) analysis is that 'confined' field trials and their regulation should simply be under the purview of the regulators to decide the outcome," the affidavit said.
The anti-GMO activist said the affidavit was being filed to provide evidence that "the apex court's mandate of independence as a regulatory objective and specifically in the context of its TEC has been breached" with Paroda's induction.
The affidavit claimed that there is evidence of both institutional and personal conflict of interest that enmesh Paroda.
"Given the serious conflict of interest that involves him on both grounds, the Government clearly misled this court by suggesting his name for a Supreme Court-appointed TEC which is required to arrive at its findings without bias," it alleged.
"Paroda ought to have recused himself for the same reason, especially after his conflict of interest became a public issue," the affidavit said.
