240 likes | 621 Vues
This document outlines the biosafety regulatory framework in India, covering key legislation, regulatory bodies, approval processes, and enforcement mechanisms related to modern biotechnology products. It emphasizes the importance of protecting human health, biodiversity, and the environment. The text highlights the roles of various government entities, such as the Ministry of Environment and Forests and the Department of Biotechnology, in overseeing biosafety in the country. Additionally, it discusses the need for harmonization, institutional strengthening, and transparency in the regulatory system.
E N D
Biosafety Regulatory Framework in India Dr Veena Chhotray, IAS Senior Fellow, TERI 7th February, 2006
‘BIOSAFETY’: Protecting human and animal health and biodiversity from the possible adverse effects of the products of modern biotechnology • Biosafety Regulatory System essential for biotechnology programme • Broad outlines: • Introductory • EPA • Statutory Rules • State Government’s Role • Identification of Gaps • Streamlining Initiatives
Indian Biosafety Regulatory System • Combination of existing and new legislations • Mix with non-statutory guidelines • Shared responsibility • Scope to evolve
The Indian Environment (Protection) Act 1986 • Umbrella legislation • ‘Hazardous substances’ • Central Government’s powers • Legal provisions • Search and seizures: CrPC • Penalties • 5-7 years imprisonment • Rs.1 lakh fine • Rs.5,000/day additional fine ‘Environment’ includes water, air and land and the relationship which exists among and between water, air and land and human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organisms and property.
1989 Rules: MoEF • Objective: protect environment, nature and health • Deals with applications of gene technology and hazardous micro-organisms • Includes: • Classification of micro-organisms or genetically engineered products • Scheme of approvals • Administrative mechanism • Punitive provisions
…1989 Rules: MoEF GEAC APPROVAL GENETIC ENGINEERING • Import • Export • Transport Hazardous • Manufacture MO/GEO • Process • Use Substances/ • Sell Cells A technique by which heritable material generated outside and inserted into a cell or organism. Includes combinations/ deletions of parts of genetic material.
Regulatory Mechanism • Ministry of Environment and Forests • Department of Biotechnology • Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (RDAC) • Review Committee on Genetic Manipulations (RCGM) • Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) • State Biosafety Coordination Committee (SBCC) • District Level Coordination Committee (DLCC)
Administrative Mechanism ADVISORY APPROVALS ENFORCEMENT • RDAC • GEAC • RCGM • IBSC • SBCC • DLCC • Serviced by DBT • Reviews biotech developments • Recommends safety regulations • Powers to inspect, investigate and punish statutory violations • Post release monitoring • State nodal agency SBCC • Serviced by MoEF • Environmental clearance - Large scale use - Release into environment • Supervises implementation • Punitive powers GEAC
RCGM Manuals of guideline Approvals: RG III & above research Approvals: contained filed trials Approvals: import for research Monitors research projects safety aspects Advisory role Link: IBSC: GEAC Administrative Mechanism APPROVALS ENFORCEMENT • IBSC • Institute level • Approval role • - R G I: Intimation • - R G II: Approval • - R G III • & above: recommen- dation • Site emergency plan • Adherence of guidelines • Nodal point for interaction • DLCC • Monitors safety regulations in installations • Post release monitoring • Reports: SBCC, GEAC
State Government’s Role Present Scenario Commercialization Enforcement R & D ENV. Release NIL NIL NIL MAIN AGENCY Felt Difficulties • ‘Navbharat’ case • Illegal BT cotton mushrooming • Differences over commercialization • Constitutional framework
Identification of Gaps: Basic Considerations Multiple Agency Synergisation Policy decisions Societal needs BALANCING Science based inputs Entrepreneurial initiatives Federal framework Integration
TRANSPARENCY CLARITY ENFORCEABILITY ADAPTABILITY PREDICATABILITY G U I D E L I N E S
Identification of Gaps • Broad Areas • Procedural streamlining • Institutional strengthening • Harmonization: National Legislations • Integration with federal structure • International Legislation • Identification of linkages and conflicts • Assessment of national implications
M S Swaminathan Task Force Involving the States Institutional Revamping Procedural Changes Transparency .
…M S Swaminathan Task Force Institutional Revamping Procedural Changes • Autonomous and professional NBRA • State Biotechnology Regulatory Board – Liaisoning with NBRA • District Biotechnology Risk Assessment and Communication Committee • Shorter regulatory track for released events • Concurrent biosafety and agronomic evaluations • MEC reports direct to GEAC • Special AICRP for GM crops
…M S Swaminathan Task Force Transparency Involving the States • Transparent field evaluations • Unfavorable results highlighted • Evaluation mechanism high credibility • Detailed record notebooks • Standing Advisory Committee - National • SAUS: Lead role in research priorities • Information about large scale trials • Social mobilization and education • Post releasing monitoring through SAUs
…M S Swaminathan Task Force Involving the States Not suggested: • Nominees in IBSC/RCGM/GEAC • Nominees in BCC/MEC In view of the federal constitutional structure of India need for greater involvement of state governments in research priorities, policy decisions & regulatory activities
Mashelkar task force on Recombinant Pharma • Objective: Streamline ambiguity: multiple regulatory agencies • Objective: Reconcile biosafety: efficiency • GEAC-Role: Environmental regulations: large scale use of LMOs • DCGI-Role: Product safety and efficiency: clinical trials: market authorization • Synchronize regulatory process: degree of environmental risk • Environmental risk: riskgroup of organisms, extent of use of LMO; end product LMO?
Other Recommendations • Time lines • Independent inspection facility • Synergisation with PQO • Standing Technical Advisory Committee on BT Regulation • National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority
Regulatory ScenarioPharmaceutical products derived from LMO’s INDIGENOUS (I) (II) EP– not LMO E P – LMO High Risk RG III & above RG I & II RCGM GEAC Less Risk More Risk RCGM GEAC - Nil RCGM GEAC yz
Regulatory ScenarioPharmaceutical products derived from LMO’s IMPORT (III) (V) (IV) EP-LMO FF EP-LMO Bulk EP-Not LMO Less Risk More Risk Least Risk RCGM - Nil GEAC xy GEAC in principle approval for import RCGM GEAC GEAC in principle approval for import/ IBSC Outside purview of 1989 Rules
RCGM A: Approval of preclinical studies B: Recommendation of human clinical trials C: Recommendation/ evaluation about containment facility Regulatory ScenarioPharmaceutical products derived from LMO’s INDIGENOUS/ IMPORT INDEX GEAC X: Prior approval for human clinical trials Y: Environmental clearance Z: Views about containment facility EP-End Product FF- Finished Formulation
Recommendations of Expert Committee on GM foods • Currently no appropriate regulatory mechanism • Need to incorporate regulatory provisions under PFA Rules 1955 • Testing of processed food difficulties: for DNA and protein • Approval of GEAC necessary • Need for national preparedness • Guidelines for regulators and analysts • Development of DNA and protein based protocols • Strengthening testing laboratories • Experiments on bioimpact with approval of IBSC/ RCGM • Independent research to establish safety of GM foods • National Reference Centre for testing of GM foods • Compulsory labelling • Indicate clearance status in country of origin • Supporting documents