Scientists warn Centre against accepting ‘compromise formula’ at plant treaty meet in Peru

The Scientists for Genetic Diversity, a group of scientists, has written to Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav, and the Director General of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research M. L. Jat expressing its concern over the “compromise proposal” presented at the 11th session of the governing body (GB11) of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The proposal pertains to the “enhancement of the functioning of the Multilateral System on Access and Benefit Sharing (MLS)”.

The GB11 is in session at Lima in Peru. The scientists allege that the proposal is fundamentally unjust, the deal is one-sided, and it’s engineered to favour big agri-businesses and big tech corporations. They urged the Centre to reject the proposal.

The “compromise proposal” offered a package of measures to enhance the functioning of the Multilateral System of Access and Benefit-sharing, including a revised Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA). Payment rates and thresholds will be approved at 12th session of the governing body (GB12), and integrated in the adopted, revised SMTA. The expansion in the coverage of the multilateral system would be finalised by the GB12.

The scientists have also recommended the establishment of an ‘Ad Hoc Expert Group’, with a time-bound mandate until the 12th session, to define the scope of the expansion.

In the letter to Mr. Chouhan, the scientists said the proposal allows multinational enterprises to consolidate a monopoly over the seed sector and gain unfettered control over the vital genetic resources of the Global South. “It is an insult to everyone’s intelligence to label this as a ‘compromise’ as it accommodates not one of the vociferous demands made by developing countries concerning justice, equity, and the acknowledgement of ownership rights held by farming and indigenous communities,” they said.

The letter added that the compromise proposal had conveniently shelved the much-neglected yet critical issue of establishing mandatory payment schedules and rates for genetic resource use to the upcoming GB12. “This deliberate shelving, after years of negotiation, serves only to maintain the status quo — unhindered access for the North and minimal financial return for the gene-rich South,” they said.

They conveyed their dismay at the “deafening silence” that marked the Indian delegation’s presence at the GB11. “The failure to strategically advocate against this flawed compromise proposal constitutes a spectacular failure to protect the rights of our farming communities, who are the true custodians of our valuable genetic resources,” the scientists said.