India News | Biodiversity Law 'most Retrograde', Passed by Rajya Sabha Without Meaningful Debate: Jairam Ramesh
Get latest articles and stories on India at LatestLY. The Congress said on Tuesday that the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill-2023 was the "most retrograde" legislation and was passed by Rajya Sabha without any meaningful debate amidst an opposition walkout.
New Delhi, Aug 1 (PTI) The Congress said on Tuesday that the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill-2023 was the "most retrograde" legislation and was passed by Rajya Sabha without any meaningful debate amidst an opposition walkout.
Congress general secretary and former Union environment minister Jairam Ramesh said the passage of the bill is another example of the gap existing between what the Narendra Modi government claims and what it actually does.
Under the Modi government, he said, in the field of environment and forests the "ease of doing business" takes precedence over protection, preservation and regeneration.
Parliament on Tuesday passed the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2023, which entails provisions for sharing benefits of biodiversity commerce with locals and also decriminalises biodiversity offences.
Also Read | Goa Shocker: Man Arrested For Attempting to Rape Girlfriend While Partying At Resort in Arpora.
The bill, which amends the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, was passed in Rajya Sabha with a voice vote. The Lok Sabha had cleared the legislation on July 25.
In a statement, Ramesh said the bill which "will soon become law is most retrograde and is yet another example of the huge gap that exists between what the Modi Government claims and actually does especially in the field of environment and forests where 'ease of doing business' takes precedence over protection, preservation and regeneration."
The bill was passed by Rajya Sabha without any meaningful debate amidst an opposition walkout, he later tweeted.
Ramesh said the bill decriminalises offences under the National Biodiversity Act of 2002 and makes them punishable with monetary fines.
"Such blanket decriminalisation and providing only for modest monetary fines that do not take into account gains obtained....the JCP (Joint Committee of Parliament) recommended that penalties should be proportionate to the gains obtained by the entities using the biomaterials illegally and the size of the company. While agreeing with this, I had also suggested that biopiracy must be dealt with on a separate footing," the former minister said.
Ramesh, who is the chairperson of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment, Forests and Climate Change, said his membership from the Joint Committee ceased on June 30, 2022 on the expiry of his term in the Rajya Sabha.
"I was not invited for its sittings thereafter even though my membership of the Rajya Sabha resumed the very next day. This, I assume, was for some procedural reason since the 2022 Monsoon session of Parliament commenced on July 18th and a fresh motion had to be moved for resumption of my membership," he said.
"The JCP has made 21 major recommendations that have my full support. What I find totally unacceptable is that the bill as passed by the Lok Sabha on July 25th 2022 and passed today by the Rajya Sabha today has rejected all but one of these recommendations of the JCP.
"This is truly extraordinary and, in my recollection, quite unprecedented. This is an insult to the collective and painstaking efforts of the JCP that spent over seven months studying the Bill and held consultations with all stakeholders," Ramesh said.
He said during the course of deliberations, he had submitted some points for consideration of the JCP which drew wide support from other members.
Listing out his points, the former minister said the bill exempts access to codified traditional knowledge from benefit-sharing provisions of the National Biodiversity Act, 2002 which were meant to protect the interests of local communities.
"This exemption could work to the disadvantage of numerous holders of traditional knowledge that is used especially in the AYUSH system of medicine. Hence, the term 'codified traditional knowledge' must be clearly defined in the bill itself.
"The bill distinguishes 'forest-based biodiversity' from 'cultivated biodiversity' and exempts cultivated medicinal plants from benefit-sharing provisions. The bill must clarify and make the basis of this distinction clear through appropriate provisions," Ramesh said.
He also suggested that the bill must stipulate that a “foreign controlled company” is one that that is incorporated or registered in India and which is controlled by a foreigner as per the Companies Act, 2013.
He also suggested that the Bill draws a distinction between a registered AYUSH practitioner and a company and exempts the former from the benefit-sharing provisions of the National Biodiversity Act, 2002.
"This may well open the door to large-scale exemptions and is undesirable since a registered AYUSH practitioner may well be having informal links with a collective which may or not have a company structure."
He suggested the Bill says that approval of the National Biodiversity Authority is required only at the time of commercialization of a patent and not at the time of application for a patent. "This has far-reaching consequences and NBA approval at the time of commercialization will be reduced to a formality," he noted.
Ramesh also said the Bill completely destroys the structure of the Chennai-based National Biodiversity Authority that was envisaged in the 2002 Act as an independent, professional organisation. It brings in sixteen New Delhi-based officials of the central government as members, he said.
(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)