No ban on glyphosate herbicide sparks fears for farmers. Ploy to shield companies?

Published 11 August 2026 · india

India is moving towards a regulatory framework that would allow the continued use of glyphosate under stricter conditions instead of imposing a complete ban, triggering

India is moving towards a regulatory framework that would allow the continued use of glyphosate under stricter conditions instead of imposing a complete ban, triggering criticism from environmental groups and farm activists who fear that the policy could end up protecting agrochemical companies while leaving farmers and consumers vulnerable to health risks. The latest development emerged from a meeting of the Registration Committee (RC) held on July 30 at the Plant Protection Unit of the Union Agriculture Ministry in Faridabad. Read Full Story At the meeting, the committee decided that glyphosate spraying should be carried out only by trained pest control operators (PCOs) in order to reduce health risks to those applying the herbicide in fields. The panel also directed the Secretary of the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee (CIBRC) to send the recommendation to the Department of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare for further consideration. Under the existing administrative system, the Agriculture Commissioner of India serves as the e officio chairman of the Registration Committee. Glyphosate was first introduced in 1974 by Monsanto under the brand name Roundup, and Monsanto was later acquired by Bayer. PLOY TO BENEFIT PRIVATE PLAYERS? Glyphosate has remained controversial for years.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified it in 2015 as a “probable carcinogen” and linked it to non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a form of blood cancer. Several countries have restricted or banned its use, while environmental organisations in India have repeatedly demanded a complete prohibition. Critics say the proposed Indian framework creates the appearance of strict regulation without removing the product from the market. Under the proposal, ordinary farmers would not be permitted to spray glyphosate directly and would instead be expected to hire licensed operators. Activists argue that this allows the herbicide to remain in widespread use while enabling authorities to claim that adequate safeguards have been introduced. They also contend that the move could provide manufacturers with a legal shield in future compensation cases by allowing companies to argue that the product was meant only for trained applicators. CONCERNS AROUND LAW ENFORCEMENT Concerns have also been raised about enforcement. Farm groups and activists say monitoring pesticide use across remote villages would be extremely difficult, as inspections in rural areas are infrequent. They fear that glyphosate could continue to be sold through existing retail channels despite the proposed restrictions. Another issue being highlighted is the continued approval of commercial registrations and imports.