PESTICIDES MANAGEMENT BILL, 2020

Summary
 The Pesticide Management Bill, 2020 was introduced in Rajya Sabha by the Minister of
Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Mr. Narendra Singh Tomar, on March 23, 2020.
 It seeks to regulate the manufacture, import, sale, storage, distribution, use, and disposal
of pesticides, in order to ensure the availability of safe pesticides and minimise the risk to
humans, animals, and environment.
 The Bill seeks to replace the Insecticides Act, 1968.
 To regulate pesticides, including their manufacture, import, packaging, labelling, pricing,
storage, advertisement, sale, transport, distribution, use and disposal in order to ensure
availability of safe and effective pesticides, and to strive to minimize risk to human
beings, animals, living organisms other than pests, and the environment with an endeavor
to promote pesticides that are biological and based on traditional knowledge and for
matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Background
 The bill will repeal the Insecticide Act, 1968 that currently regulates pesticide use in the
country.
 In 2008, the former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh led-central government first
contemplated over a new law, but then the bill could not be introduced.
 In 2008, the Pesticide Management Bill (PMB, 2008) was drafted for the first time after
due consultation with stakeholders. The bill was approved by the cabinet but, after being
introduced in the Rajya Sabha, it was referred to the standing committee on agriculture.
The bill was again approved by the cabinet after incorporating amendments suggested by
the standing committee. However, the bill was sent for a fresh review after dissolution of
the Lok Sabha.
 In 2015, the government again decided to examine the bill and referred it to the
legislative department for vetting.
  By that time, the original PMB, 2008 had undergone substantive changes. So, it was
decided to withdraw the bill and introduce a new bill – PMB, 2017 – incorporating all the
amendments.
 A draft Pesticide Management Bill, 2017 was earlier released for comments in February
2018.
 The reason cited by the government for introducing this new bill was the inadequacy of
the 50-year-old insecticide law to meet the needs of multi-dimensional management and
administration of pesticides.
 The Prime Minister had put out a clarion call to farmers in his Independence Day speech
in 2019, asking for a reduction in toxic chemicals in farming.
 This bill aims to thus ensure access to safe pesticides and

Purpose
 India is the fourth-largest producer of pesticides in the world, with the market
segmentation tilted mainly towards insecticides, with herbicides on the increase in the
recent past. It is reported that eight states consume more than 70% of the pesticides used
in India.
 There are 292 pesticides registered in the country, and it is estimated that there are around
104 pesticides that are continued to be produced/ used in India that have been banned in
two or more countries in the world.
 The industry has grown to be an INR 20,000 crores business in India, with the top 3
companies having a market share of 57%.
 Amongst the crops, paddy accounts for the maximum share of consumption (26-28%),
followed by cotton (18-20%), notwithstanding all the hype around Bt technology.
 The acute pesticide poisoning deaths and hospitalizations that Indian farmworkers and
farmers fall prey to are ignominious by now.
 It is not just human beings but wildlife and livestock that are poisoned routinely by toxic
pesticides as numerous reports indicate.
Key Features and Analysis
 Pest and pesticide: The Bill defines a pest as any species of animal, plant, or pathogenic
agent that is unwanted, or injurious to plants, humans, animals, and the environment. A
pesticide is any substance of chemical or biological origin intended for preventing or
destroying any pest in agriculture, industry, public health, pest control operations, or for
ordinary use.
 Central Pesticides Board: The central government will constitute the Central Pesticides
Board to advise the central and state governments on scientific and technical matters
arising under the Act. It will also advise the central government in formulating standards
and best practices for: (i) pesticide manufacturers, laboratories, and pest control
operators, (ii) working conditions and training of workers, and (iii) recall and disposal of
pesticides. The Board will also frame model protocols to deal with poisoning cases due
to pesticides.
 Registration of pesticides: Persons seeking to import or manufacture a pesticide for
ordinary use, agriculture, industry, pest control, or public health, are required to obtain a
certificate of registration for the pesticide from the Registration Committee. The
Committee will be constituted by the central government, and will: (i) specify the
conditions for granting a certificate and issue certificates, (ii) periodically review the
safety and efficacy of registered pesticides, and amend or cancel their certificates, and
(iii) notify substances which cause the same chemical or biological action as a pesticide.
 Registration criteria: The Committee will evaluate the information submitted in the
application about the pesticide on factors such as safety, efficacy, necessity, end-use,
risks, and availability of safer alternatives. It will not register a pesticide if the applicant
submits false or misleading information, or if the maximum limits for the residue of the
pesticide on crops and commodities are not specified under the Food Safety and
Standards Act, 2006. It may also not register the pesticide if there is scientific
uncertainty regarding its risks and benefits, and threats of serious and irreversible damage
to human health, other living organisms, or the environment.
 Licenses: A person seeking to manufacture, distribute, exhibit for sale, sell, or stock
pesticides, or undertake pest control operations is required to obtain a license from the
 Licensing Officer, who may be appointed by the state government. Once the registration
certificate for a pesticide is issued, the applicant must obtain a license within the
specified period, failing which the certificate will be cancelled. License is not required
for selling or storing ordinary use pesticides (intended for use only in households, offices,
and similar premises), which may be notified by the central government.
 A person’s licence will be revoked if he is convicted of an offence under the Act. It can
also be revoked if he: (i) violates the conditions under which the licence was granted, (ii)
contravenes the provisions of the Act or the rules made under the Act, or (iii) had
submitted false or misleading information to obtain the licence.
 Prices: If the central government considers it necessary or expedient to secure the
distribution and availability of pesticides at fair prices, it may constitute an authority to
regulate their price in a manner as it may prescribe.
 Prohibition on certain pesticides: The central and state governments may, by
notification, prohibit the distribution, sale, or use of a pesticide or a specified batch in an
area, up to a period of one year. Pesticides can be prohibited if: (i) they pose a risk to, or
can adversely impact human health, other living organisms, or the environment, or (ii)
they pose a barrier in international trade of agriculture commodities.
 Pesticide inspector: The central and state governments may, by notification, appoint
pesticide inspectors for certain areas. A pesticide inspector can: (i) enter and search a
premises or vehicle if he suspects commission of an offence or wants to check
compliance, (ii) seize any document, material, or stock of pesticides, (iii) send samples of
pesticides for test and analysis, and (iv) with the Executive Magistrate’s approval, stop
the sale, use, distribution, or disposal of pesticides for a period of up to 60 days or until
the receipt of the sample test reports.
 Offences: Under the Bill, manufacturing, importing, distributing, selling, exhibiting for
sale, transporting, storing, or undertaking pest control operations, without a license or
certificate is punishable with imprisonment of up to three years, or a fine of up to Rs 40
lakh, or both. Persons using pesticides in their own household, kitchen-garden, or land
under their own cultivation are not liable for prosecution for any offence under the Bill.
Criticisms and Recommendations:

1. Declaration of expediency of Union control

Under Sec. 2 of the bill, it is declared that it is expedient in the public interest that Union
should take under its control the regulation of pesticide industry. As per Constitution of
India’s Schedule VII, Agriculture and specifically, “protection against pests and prevention
of plant diseases” falls under State List. States should therefore be empowered to regulate.
Here, registration can be done by the Union whereas licensing for sales and prohibition
within their territories, apart from quality control on a routine basis, can be state
responsibility.

2. Definition of Poisoning should be expanded to include livestock and other animals of

livelihood source”
This Act is proposing the constitution of a fund that will support compensation and redressal
for affected persons and pesticides are known to poison not just human beings, but livestock
and other animals of livelihood source like fish stocks. Therefore, the definition of poisoning
is being expanded, to ensure that the statute is actually useful to affected persons in accessing
compensation and redressal.

3. “Risk” in relation to pesticides does not account for End Use Conditions
As acknowledged and recommended by international UN agencies also, risk is not just
about inherent property of a pesticide and the probability of exposure, but also about end-
use conditions (socio-economic, cultural etc.) in a country. Inhalation and accidental
poisonings depend a lot on such use conditions. Risk assessment should therefore, build
in an assessment of such end-use conditions, and take a precautionary approach.

4. Regulation of Commercial Pest Control:

 With commercial pest control operations on the rise in households, sanitation and
agriculture, it is important to regulate them, by including the definition and a provision in grant
of licence. Commercial Pest Control Operation” means any application or dispersion of
Insecticide including fumigants in household or public or private premises or land and includes
pest control operations in the fields (including aerial applications for commercial purposes) but
excludes individual farmer use.

5. The Bill should also focus on “Export” of pesticides rather than only focusing on imports
Under sec. 16 on Requirement to register pesticides, Any person desiring to import or
manufacture any pesticide for ordinary use, use in agriculture, storage, industry, pest
control operations or public health, shall make an application to the Registration
Committee for a certificate of registration. However, India is known to be exporting
highly hazardous pesticides to other developing and least developed countries and this
needs to be regulated for India to assume global leadership in this arena.

6. The fixation of MRLs has to be widened to include non-approved uses also, to a

maximum possible number of crops and commodities before a pesticide can be
registered.
It is often seen that pesticide residues turn up in India on commodities for which a
pesticide’s use has not been approved and for which no MRL has therefore been fixed. In
the case of glyphosate, as another illustration. The FSSAI had to then take guidance from
international standards and fix an MRL.

Standing committee Report of Pesticides Management Bill 2008

 The Standing Committee on Agriculture submitted its 46th report on the Pesticides
Management Bill, 2008 on February 18, 2009. The chairperson of the committee is Shri
Anant Gangaram Geete.
 The Bill seeks to regulate the manufacture, quality, import, export, and sale of pesticides,
ensure availability of quality pesticides, and minimize contamination of agricultural
commodities with pesticide residue. It repeals the Insecticides Act, 1968.
 The Committee recommended that the definition of ‘pesticide; in the Bill be broadened to
include pesticides used not only for agricultural purposes but also for health care.
 The Bill defines misbranded pesticides as those that are mislabelled, do not conform to
prescribed standards, lack warning information to prevent risk to humans, or contain a
different expiration date from its approved shelf-life. The Standing Committee
recommends also adding pesticides that do not conform to any other tests specified by the
Registration Committee to the definition.
 The Bill defines spurious pesticides to include those that are unregistered, imitations,
expired, etc. The Committee recommends adding ‘any pesticide sold under a name of
another or infringes a trade mark of another manufacturer’ to the definition.
 The Bill creates the Central Pesticides Board which shall consist of representatives from
different ministries, departments, and government officials. The Committee feels that the
Board should be consist of only experts from the relevant government ministries and two
farmers representatives.
 The central government shall establish a Registration Committee to register pesticides,
specify infrastructure requirements, and outline protocols and manufacturing practices.
The Registration Committee shall also allow, restrict or prohibit the use of pesticides.
The Committee believes that the powers to prohibit the sale, distribution, or use of
pesticides for a specific period is the responsibility of the central government. Any
reference to the word ’prohibit’ should be deleted from this clause.
 The Registration Committee shall specify guidelines for regulating advertising pesticides
in the media. The Committee feels that this should be the function of the Central
Pesticides Board.
 The Committee believes that the registration of pesticides should be a transparent and
efficient process. It recommends that the registration certificate should be granted within
one year of the application.
 Data submitted for registration of pesticide, cannot be used by any other person for
registration of the same pesticide for a period of 3 years. The Committee recommends
that this period be raised to five years.
The central government shall decide any appeals against decisions of the Registration
Committee. The Standing Committee recommends that the central government address appeals
within a prescribed time frame.
 The state government may appoint licensing officers to grant licenses for the manufacture
or sale of pesticides or commercial pest control operations. Appeals against decisions of
the licensing authority shall be made by the appellate authority and decided within six
months. The Committee recommends deciding appeals within 90 days.
 The central government may establish a Central Pesticides Laboratory and accredit
private laboratories to carry out the same functions as the Central Pesticides Laboratory.
The Committee suggests that the government should only recognize private laboratories
that fellow the Good Lab Practices and are accredited by the National Accreditation
Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories.
 The central or state governments may appoint pesticide analysts and pesticide inspectors.
Pesticide inspectors have the power to enter and search premises and take records
maintained by the manufacturer. The Committee believes that the power to seize
documents should be done only with prior permission of the executive magistrate.
 The Committee recommends that the pesticide inspector send samples to the pesticide
analyst within 24 hours instead of 48 hours. A report of the sample should be submitted
in 30 days rather than 45 days and the delivery of the report within 10 days rather than 15
days.
 The Committee recommends that a pesticide user should have the right to get a sample
analyzed at an accredited lab. If the pesticide is misbranded or spurious, the user shall be
entitled to a refund of the fee for testing.
 The Committee suggests that pesticide inspectors who exercise their power without
reasonable proof should be held liable for a fine between Rs 10,000 and Rs 25,000.
Similarly, pesticide analysts producing fictitious test results should be liable for a fine
between Rs 25,000 and one lakh.

Laws from other Jurisdictions/ Countries

United States of America
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates pesticides at the
national level. Congress gives the EPA this authority through several federal laws, including the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). By regulating pesticides, the EPA
works to protect human health and the environment.

The EPA works cooperatively with state agencies to review pesticide safety data and register
pesticide products, educate professional applicators, monitor compliance, and investigate
pesticide problems. Other areas of focus include pesticide and agricultural worker safety,
endangered species and pollinator protection, reducing pesticide drift, and reporting pesticide
incidents. Regional EPA offices can provide guidance on importing and exporting pesticides to
and from United States.
 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA): Gives the EPA authority to
regulate the sale, use and distribution of pesticides.
 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA): Gives the EPA authority to set limits
on the amount of pesticide residues allowed on food or animal feed. These limits are
called tolerances.
 Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA): This act amended FIFRA and FFDCA by
increasing the safety standards for new pesticides used on foods. FQPA also required
older pesticides and previously established tolerances to be periodically re-assessed using
the new, tougher standards.
 Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA): Establishes the fees and time-lines
associated with pesticide registration actions.
 Endangered Species Act (ESA): Requires the EPA to assess the risk of pesticides to
threatened or endangered species and their habitats.

Of these FIFRA is most crucial when it comes to Pesticide regulation. The Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) provides for federal regulation of pesticide distribution,
sale, and use. All pesticides distributed or sold in the United States must be registered (licensed)
by EPA. Before EPA may register a pesticide under FIFRA, the applicant must show, among
other things, that using the pesticide according to specifications "will not generally cause
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.''

FIFRA defines the term ''unreasonable adverse effects on the environment'' to mean: ''(1) any
unreasonable risk to man or the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and
environmental costs and benefits of the use of any pesticide, or (2) a human dietary risk from
residues that result from a use of a pesticide in or on any food inconsistent with the standard
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.''

United Kingdom
Pesticides are currently regulated through a variety of EU and UK laws. In order to ensure these
laws are implemented, numerous European and UK bodies and institutions are involved. At the
European level the key agencies responsible for governing pesticides include the European
Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), in addition to the
European Commission and Parliament which also play a role.
When we leave the EU therefore, we aren’t just facing losing the laws themselves but also the
institutions which apply them (this is known as the ‘governance gap’). The UK must make sure
to replace the functions of these bodies if we want our pesticide regime to work properly.

There are three main areas of pesticide policy which are regulated:
1. How pesticides are licensed – ‘authorisations’
Pesticides that can be sold and used have to first be authorised. Currently, active substances (the
chemically active part of a manufactured product) is authorised at the European level. This
authorisation has to take place before an active substance can be sold and then again at regular
intervals for as long as it is on the market.
A range of EU institutions are involved in authorising active substances. Their role is to ensure
that the process is carried out transparently and independently so that decisions are based on
scientific evidence and protect human health and the environment from harm, while still enabling
farmers to access pesticides. The UK does not currently have the capacity to manage its own
process for authorising active substances, therefore, Brexit leaves us with a deeply concerning
governance gap.
Once an active substance has been authorised it is then up to individual Member States to decide
whether to authorise particular pesticide formulations (also known as pesticide products). The
UK has always managed this process and this will not change due to Brexit.

2. How and where pesticides can be used

The EU also sets out rules for how and where pesticides can be used in the UK. The aim of these
rules is to ensure that pesticides are used in a sustainable way, reducing risks and impacts on
human health and the environment.
This area of pesticide regulation covers issues such as: what training is required for users; how
application equipment should be maintained and inspected; measures to protect water and
aquatic life from contamination; and how pesticides should be stored and handled.
The UK has already transposed the key EU directive on this area of pesticide policy into national
law and was also obliged to create a National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides
in 2012. There is also a UK-specific Code of Practice and various other guidance for pesticide
users.

As a result Brexit should not result in huge gaps in either legislation or governance.

3. How pesticides affect food?

Pesticides used in agriculture will often be detectable as residues in food. The EU sets what are
known as ‘Maximum Residue Levels’ for each individual active substance that is authorised for
use. The Maximum Residue Level will be different depending on the food item (for example the
maximum residue level of the fungicide Imazalil allowed on apples will be different to pears).
The EU is responsible for setting, monitoring and updating tens of thousands of individual
Maximum Residue Levels.
These Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) apply to both produce grown within the EU and
produce that is imported. If food is found to contain residues above the Maximum Residue Level
it cannot be sold within the EU. Similarly, if the residue of an active substance that has been
banned in the EU is detected then the food cannot be sold.
Currently, the UK has no capacity to take on the mammoth task of setting our own Maximum
Residue Levels. Rather than invest the considerable time and money this would require, we may
decide to stick to those set by the EU. Another option would be to default to the Maximum
Residue Levels set by the Codex Alimentarius which sits under the UN’s Food and Agriculture
Organisation. However, these tend to be less stringent than those set by the EU, meaning that UK
citizens could soon be facing higher levels of pesticide residues in our food.