‘Seeds Bill will not harm farmer rights’

Why in the News

The Union Agriculture Minister has said the proposed Seeds Bill will not be detrimental to the rights of farmers. The statement followed a meeting with about 20 farmers’ organisations on the draft Seeds Bill and the draft Pesticides Management Bill. The Centre’s stated case is that the Seeds Act, 1966 no longer matches contemporary farming practice, and that 70% of the seed Indian farmers use falls outside its purview. The Ministry has said every policy will be finalised on the basis of consensus after discussion with farmers, and that traditional seeds will be conserved. The contest is between tighter regulation of the seed trade, which runs on registration and traceability, and the informal exchange through which most smallholders obtain planting material.

Why does the Centre want new seed and pesticide statutes?

1. The governing law is six decades old: The Seeds Act, 1966 is no longer in tune with contemporary farming practices, on the Ministry’s own assessment.
2. Most seed sits outside its reach: 70% of the seed used by Indian farmers falls outside the purview of the existing Act, so the standards it sets govern a minority of actual sowing.
3. Spurious seed is the stated target: A crackdown on “fake” seeds is the immediate purpose of replacing the Act.
4. Traceability is the proposed mechanism: A traceability system, which links a seed lot back to its producer through the supply chain, is intended to let a farmer identify the right seed before sowing.
5. A parallel pesticide statute: A new pesticide management law is sought on the same logic, to identify substandard pesticides in the market.

Who has been consulted, and on what terms?

1. Scope of the consultation: About 20 farmers’ organisations were brought in on both draft Bills together rather than on the seed law alone.
2. Who was in the room: The Bharatiya Kisan Sangh, various factions of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, the All India Kisan Coordination Committee (AIKCC) and the Kisan Mahapanchayat, among others, presented their views.
3. The official side: The Union Agriculture Secretary and other senior officials of the ministry attended.
4. The stated decision rule: The Centre has committed to finalising policy by consensus with farmers, and to conserving traditional seed varieties.

Challenges to the Seeds Bill

1. Registration can narrow informal exchange: Compulsory registration of varieties raises the cost of selling seed outside the formal trade, which is where most smallholder exchange happens. Eg. Farm saved and farmer to farmer seed still supplies a large share of the area under pulses and coarse cereals.
   The Fix: Write an express exemption for the sale and exchange of unbranded farm saved seed into the statute itself rather than leaving it to subordinate rules.
2. Overlap with the existing plant variety law: Farmers’ rights to save, use, sow, exchange and sell the produce of a protected variety already sit in the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, and a new seed statute can cut across them. Eg. That Act bars a farmer only from selling branded seed of a protected variety, not from exchanging it.
   The Fix: State the relationship between the two statutes on the face of the Bill, so the earlier right is not read down by implication.
3. Compensation for seed failure is hard to obtain: A farmer who sows spurious or poorly germinating seed loses an entire season and then has to prove causation to recover anything. Eg. Cotton growers in Telangana and Maharashtra have repeatedly reported germination failure in purchased seed lots.
   The Fix: Fix a statutory time bound compensation route through a district level seed committee rather than leaving the farmer to consumer litigation.
4. Enforcement capacity sits with the States: Seed inspection and seed testing laboratories are run by State governments and are thinly staffed, so a traceability mandate can outrun the machinery meant to police it. Eg. Sampling and prosecution depend on notified State seed inspectors and a limited network of notified seed testing laboratories.
   The Fix: Fund State seed testing laboratory capacity and tie dealer licence renewal to sampling and reporting performance.

Conclusion

Neither draft has reached Parliament, and the consultation route the Ministry has chosen makes the text itself the thing to watch rather than the assurance around it. The unresolved question is where the line falls between a seed a farmer may freely exchange and a seed that must be registered, labelled and traced. An assurance that rights will not be harmed carries weight only if that line is drawn in the statute rather than in rules framed later.

Back2Basics: Seeds Act, 1966

1. What it regulates: The Act governs the quality of seed sold in India by empowering the Centre to notify kinds and varieties of seed and to prescribe minimum standards for them.
2. The standards it sets: Notified seed must meet prescribed limits for germination and genetic and physical purity, and must carry a label stating them.
3. Who enforces it: State level seed certification agencies certify seed and notified seed inspectors draw samples and prosecute violations.
4. What it leaves out: The Act regulates only notified kinds and varieties, so seed outside that list is not covered by its standards.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2019] Consider the following statements: 1. According to the Indian Patents Act, a biological process to create a seed can be patented in India. 2. In India, there is no Intellectual Property Appellate Board. 3. Plant varieties are not eligible to be patented in India. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 and 3 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 ANSWER: (c)”