A prominent farmers’ organisation in India has voiced serious concerns about proposed changes to an international treaty on plant genetic resources. The Rashtriya Kisan Mahasangh (RKM) is urging the Indian government to reject amendments to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). They believe these changes could seriously harm India’s control over its own seeds and plant varieties.
The ITPGRFA aims to ensure fair access to and sharing of benefits from plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Currently, a specific list of 64 crops, known as Annex 1, is covered by the treaty’s Multilateral System (MLS). This means these crops are readily shared among countries that have signed the treaty. However, a proposed amendment seeks to expand this list significantly, potentially covering almost all plant genetic resources used for food and agriculture.
K.V. Biju, the National Coordinator of the RKM, explained the main worry. “Expanding the MLS would fundamentally compromise India’s sovereign control over its seeds and plant genetic resources,” he stated at a protest meeting. These resources are seen as crucial national assets that farmers have nurtured for centuries.
The RKM highlights a critical shift proposed in the treaty. Currently, it operates on a “positive list” system, meaning only the crops listed are subject to sharing. The proposed amendment suggests a “negative list” approach. Under this new system, India would have to grant access to virtually every plant resource unless it is specifically excluded from a list. “If India fails to mention a plant species in its negative list during ratification, even a rare or newly discovered endemic species would permanently fall under MLS access,” Biju warned.
This expansion could be far-reaching. The definition of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (PGRFA) might include any plant with potential value for research. This could potentially cover up to 30,000 edible plants out of the 350,000 known species. The RKM fears this would leave India with little say over its natural biological wealth.
Adding to their concerns, the RKM pointed out a potential conflict of interest. India’s current representative in these treaty negotiations, Dr. Sunil Archak, also serves as the co-chair of the working group proposing the amendment. The farmers’ group argues that this dual role compromises objective negotiation and has called for a new negotiator from the Ministry of External Affairs.
During a recent stakeholder consultation, Dr. Archak presented arguments supporting the amendment. He suggested that India has the freedom to decide which resources to share and that India benefits from the MLS by receiving seeds it needs, such as soybean and tomato. He also stated that the amendments are not obligatory and that India can choose not to share its resources.
However, the RKM strongly disagrees with these points. They provided excerpts from the treaty’s Articles 11 and 12, arguing that these provisions are mandatory and do not offer discretion to deny access to listed PGRFA through the MLS. They also contested the claim that India does not share farmers’ varieties, citing a government notification from 2016 that includes such varieties.
The RKM believes the current system is not transparent and that the proposed changes could lead to the loss of national sovereignty over valuable plant genetic resources. They are pushing for a complete rejection of the amendment to protect the rights of Indian farmers and the nation’s agricultural heritage.