Supreme Court on Endosulfan

When I wrote about Endosulfan last week, I ended my post with a note saying that the Supreme Court's decision was due to arrive shortly then. Since then, the Supreme Court has indeed passed its comments, and they have banned the production and use of the drug for the next eight months, till they receive and study two research reports currently being prepared on the issue.

Even then, I had said that even though the cost on human life and health is great because of the use of the drug, that is not the only factor that the government and the judiciary must consider when deciding on the merits or demerits of taking a decision on it.

For one, what alternative does the farmer have if not Endosulfan? Unfortunately, none, or at least none that is safer than Endosulfan. With the Supreme Court banning the production and use of the pesticide, many farmers are up in arms because they fear without the drug, the success of their crop will be in serious jeopardy. Besides, the industry is estimated to be worth Rs. 500 crore, and probably employs a substantial number in the organized and unorganized sector.

And of course, as I had written earlier, one simply can't dismiss the serious economic costs of putting an end to its use. One point raised by the Solicitor General was that Endosulfan still did not have any conclusive evidence of its toxicity, and that perhaps the sufferings in Kasargod were a result of its over-excessive use, which some other media reports point to as well.

A distinct characteristic of a free (well, relatively free in our case) society is that you can question even the person who gives the judgement. So the association of manufacturers questioned the very right of the Supreme Court in this matter to pass judgement, and thus, they said, over arch themselves into the executive domain. When the government of India has checks and balances in place to monitor and report on the use and 'alleged' effects of using the pesticide, why should the judiciary get involved in it?

The sad fact is that the government still has not conducted any thorough study till date. Had such a study been conducted, and there was some greater understanding on the actual toxicity of the drug in humans, flora and fauna, then perhaps the steps to counter it could have been started much earlier. Of course, the system in India is not designed to pre-empt anything. Its only meant to shuffle around AFTER tragedies occur. Thus, as the Supreme Court rightly said, when the issue becomes the protection of life itself, then the protection of business interests and all other interests become secondary.