Biological Diversity Amendment Bill Passed in Lok Sabha

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News?
• Background
• Key Provisions of the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021
• Criticism of the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

Why in News?

• The Lok Sabha has passed the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021.

 

Background

• In light of India’s commitments under Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) of 1992, the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 was passed by the Parliament.
  • The CBD recognises sovereign rights over biological resources and permits countries to regulate access to these resources as per their national legislation.
• The Act regulates access to biological resources and associated traditional knowledge.  
  • To do this, it formulates a three-tier structure consisting of a National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) at the national level, State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) at the State level and Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) at local body levels.
• In December 2021, the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was introduced in Lok Sabha.
• The Bill seeks to amend the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 to –
  • encourage the Indian system of medicine and cultivation of wild medicinal plants,
  • facilitate fast-tracking of processes for research, patent application, and transfer of research results,
  • decriminalise offences, and
  • encourage foreign investment in the sector.

 

Key Provisions of the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021

• Access to biological resources and associated knowledge –
  • The Biological Diversity Act requires prior approval or intimation to the regulatory authority based on the origin of the entity for obtaining biological resources occurring in India or associated knowledge.
  • The Bill amends the classification of entities, list of activities requiring intimation, and adds exemptions.
• Approval for Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) –
  • The Act specifies that approval of National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) is required before: (i) applying for IPR involving biological resources obtained from India, or (ii) sealing of patent. 
  • The Bill provides that approval will be required before the grant of IPR instead of before the application itself.
• Benefit Sharing –
  • Under the Act, NBA is required to determine terms of benefit sharing while granting approvals for various activities. 
  • Benefit sharing refers to requiring applicants to share monetary and non-monetary benefits with benefit claimers and local people.
  • Benefit claimers are conservers of biodiversity, or creators or holders of associated traditional knowledge. 
  • The Act makes benefit sharing provisions applicable to research, commercial utilisation, as well as bio-survey and bio-utilisation for certain entities. 
  • The Bill removes its applicability from research, and bio-survey and bio-utilisation.
• Offences and Penalties –
  • Under the Act, offences include failing to take approval or providing prior intimation for various activities. 
  • These offences are punishable with imprisonment of up to five years, or a fine, or both. 
  • The Bill decriminalises the offences and makes offences punishable with a penalty between one lakh rupees and Rs 50 lakh.

 

Criticism of the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021

• Reduced role of Local Bodies –
  • The Bill removes the direct role of local bodies and benefit claimers in determining mutually agreed terms. 
  • The Act states that while granting approvals for various activities, National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) will determine terms for benefit sharing. 
  • Such approval should be in accordance with the mutually agreed terms between the applicant, concerned local bodies, and benefit claimers.
  • The Bill amends this to require that approvals should be in accordance with mutually agreed terms between the applicant and the concerned Biodiversity Management Committee represented by NBA. 
  • Thus, benefit claimers and local people will not be directly involved in setting the terms and conditions.
• Removal of Prior Informed Consent –
  • Further, there is no provision for a mechanism for obtaining prior informed consent of the local and indigenous communities. 
  • This may be in contrast with the framework under Nagoya Protocol.
  • Nagoya Protocol requires a signatory country to ensure that prior informed consent or approval and involvement of indigenous and local communities is obtained for access to genetic resources and traditional knowledge.
• Change of Adjudicating Authority –
  • The Bill changes the adjudicating authority from a Judge to a government official. 
  • The penalty decisions will be based on an inquiry instead of a judgement after arguments in an open court.
  • The question is whether it is appropriate to confer such discretion to government officials.

 

---

Q1) What is the Convention on Biological Diversity?

The United Nations CBD is the international legal instrument for "the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources" that has been ratified by 196 nations.

 

Q2) What is the mandate of Nagoya Protocol?

The Nagoya Protocol applies to genetic resources that are covered by the CBD, and to the benefits arising from their utilization. The protocol also covers traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources that are covered by the CBD and the benefits arising from its utilization.

 

---

Source: Supreme Court acknowledges political parties’ fear of RTI to disclose internal decision making | PRS India