,
7 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Had 2 amazing days- on Thurs, presented @TakshashilaInst's governance framework on gene editing for human applications to students of @IBAB4's B4 SynBio program & on Fri, had thought-provoking discussions with @grumpeoldman, @sunil_abraham & others on the DNA Tech Bill @iTEchAsia
The @IBAB4 students and I discussed the need for gene editing policy in India, the benefits/risks of gene editing in humans and the principles of prioritising India's national interest, inclusive and scientific policymaking which are at the core of @TakshashilaInst's frameworks.
One of the students asked how to account for economic considerations when deciding policy & another asked how to analyse alternatives to the same problem. Two salient features of policy analysis & oh the joy that these young science students are already thinking about them.
On Fri, had a long discussion with Murali @grumpeoldman about how the DNA Tech Bill is insufficient to deliver on its promise to provide speedier justice. In its current form, its potential benefits outweigh its risks and it needs a serious review to make it effective.
For example, crime scene DNA could result in the implication of many innocent bystanders without their knowledge. Because of the absence of automatic purge, their DNA would remain in the crime scene index, even after the case is closed.
DNA Tech is in use in India and has benefits in providing exculpatory evidence, verifying bodies and sometimes as corroborative evidence. Without changes to Evidence Act and CrPC, the impact of this Bill on the judicial process is minimal. How will this Bill then aid in justice?
Oops - I have made a blatant error in my tweet! I meant to say its risks outweigh its potential benefits and it needs a serious review.
