Why in the
News?
Lok Sabha has passed the Biological Diversity (Amendment)
bill, 2021 replacing Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
Background of
the bill:
Reasons for
introduction of biological Diversity Act, 2002:
1. Anthropogenic
activities leading to loss of biodiversity and extinction of species.
2. Concerns of bio-piracy- unauthorized appropriation of biological resources and related knowledge belonging to indigenous communities.
3. India became a
signatory of Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1992.
4. Based on the above
factors, the Biological Diversity Act, 2002
was passed with the following provisions:
a.
Regulates access to biological resources and
associated traditional knowledge.
b.
Establishment of a three-tier structure for
regulation:
•
National Biodiversity Authority at the national
level
•
State Biodiversity Boards at the state level,
•
Biodiversity Management Committees at the
local body level.
c.
Sharing of benefits with conservers of biodiversity
and possessors of associated
knowledge for its use in Research, Commercial utilization,
bio-survey and bio-utilisation for certain entities. The benefits to be shared includes,
(i)
Monetary compensation,
(ii) Sharing of
intellectual property rights
(iii) Technology
transfer.
The terms for benefit sharing shall be in mutually agreed
terms and conditions between the
applicant, local bodies concerned, and the benefit
claimers.
The Biological
Diversity (Amendment) bill, 2021:
Key Features
1. Access to
biological resources and associated knowledge occurring within Indiashall require prior approval of the
regulatory authorities-
·
National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) and
·
State Biodiversity Boards (SBB).
2. Approval for
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
|
BDA, 2002 1. Approval
of NBA is required
before: (i)
applying for IPR involving biological resources
obtained from India or (ii)
sealing of patent |
BDA, 2021 1.Approval will be
required before the grant of
IPR instead of before the application itself. |
|
2. The
act encompasses IPR alone and not
associated knowledge. |
2. The Bill
extends approval requirement to IPR on associated knowledge also. |
3. The bill amends benefit sharing provisions to
replace as mutually agreed terms between
the applicant and the Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC) represented by
NBA.
4. The Bill changes punishments into penalties
ranging from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 50 lakh & continued contravention
attracting additional penalty of up to Rs.1crore.
5. The bill simplifies compliance requirements
for domestic companies.
6. Exemption provided for sharing benefits with
local communities to users of codified traditional knowledge and AYUSH
practitioners.
Issues with the
bill:
1. The term ‘codified traditional knowledge' has
not been defined, which leads to a broad
interpretation that almost all traditional knowledge will be exempted from the benefit sharing requirements.
2. Direct role of local bodies and benefit
claimants in determining mutually agreed terms
has been deleted from the provisions of the bill as it is now replaced by mutual terms between the applicant and
the Biodiversity Management Committee represented by NBA.
3. There is no provision for prior informed
consent of the local and indigenous communities.
· This negates the framework under Nagoya
Protocol which requires the signatory
country to ensure that prior informed consent and involvement of indigenous and
local communities is obtained for access to genetic resources and traditional
knowledge.
4.
Provisions regarding penalty for offenses-
· The adjudicating officer has no guidance on how to assess the penalty as there is no differentiation made based on the type of offence.
· The adjudicating authority is a government official rather than a judge, which raises questions on the suitability to authorise the use of such discretion by government officials.
