Sections of scientists on Monday asked India’s apex agricultural research agency to revoke what they described as a “gag order” intended to prevent former government researchers from articulating concerns about genetically modified mustard.

Over 60 scientists have signed a statement accusing the Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR) of trying to “silence the voices” of public sector scientists on the environmental release of GM mustard that has evoked protests from activists and farmers.

ICAR director-general Himanshu Pathak had on December 23 issued a statement explaining the decision by an environment ministry panel in October 2022 to approve the environmental release of GM mustard, outlining its potential economic benefits, and seeking to allay biosafety concerns.

Pathak had also asserted that any opinion by “anyone not authorised or former ICAR employees” not endorsed by the ICAR would be “subjectable to administrative procedures required in public interest”.

The statement released on Monday by scientists said the ICAR “is appearing to silence the voices of public sector scientists by invoking administrative procedures… and this is also being extended to retired scientists”.

“Science is about asking questions and seeking answers…. Science progresses (through) being critical of conclusions already made, and questioning certainties, clarifying niggling doubts, and double-checking results,” the statement said.

“It is the duty of a confident and progressive government to invite open and transparent public debate based on scientific facts and set a precedent of public participation in issues related to policy choices of technology,” it said.

The statement from the ICAR “is in effect a gag order by which scientific temper and independent inquiry is being discouraged among current serving and even retired scientists”.

“This is not expected, and certainly not from an elected democratic government in 21st century India,” the scientists have added in the statement, which calls on the ICAR to withdraw the directive.

Among the statement’s signatories are Dhiraj Singh, a crop scientist and former director of the ICAR Directorate for Rapeseed Mustard Research; Suman Sahai, a plant geneticist; Vipul Kelkar, a plant biotechnologist; Soma Marla, a crop scientist; and Vidyanand Nanjundiah, an evolutionary biologist.

The Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), the environment ministry panel, had in October 2022 approved the supervised environmental release of GM mustard developed by scientists at the University of Delhi South Campus (UDSC) for field tests and seed production.

The GEAC decision has evoked protests from activists campaigning against GM crops, sections of farmers, and some scientists.

Singh is among former government scientists who have questioned the decision to approve the environmental release of GM mustard.

Pathak had in his statement asserted that field trials on the GM mustard, designed to assess the impact on human health and the environment, had been conducted according to stipulated guidelines and applicable rules and that the GM mustard had shown 28 per cent more yield than the “national check”.

The UDSC scientists too have iterated that the GM mustard would generate 25 per cent additional yield.

Singh, however, has questioned these promises. “Our best-performing mustard hybrids have yields higher than GM mustard,” Singh had told The Telegraph in November.“Why did they not compare their yield with the best-performing mustard?”

India’s crop biotechnology scientists have long complained that the Centre’s slow movement on GM food crops has denied the country potential gains it could have made through GM crops that many other countries have cultivated over the past two decades.

Pathak had said that GM crops were currently grown across 195 million hectares in over 30 countries and “there is no evidence of adverse effects reported from the use of GM crops globally”.

“And India is already importing GM canola oil for its domestic need,” Pathak said.“The GM mustard would increase domestic production of mustard oil and help reduce India’s edible oil import bill.”

Pathak also said that the GM mustard would be released for commercial cultivation only if it was found significantly superior against present-day varieties and hybrids.

Deepak Pental, a senior UDSC scientist who had led the effort to develop GM mustard, had said last week that the opposition to GM food crops was “ideological” and not based on genuine science.