Union Home Minister Amit Shah chaired a high-level security review meeting

New rules on animal testing must take India forward, not backwards: Maneka Gandhi Officials maintain the changes seek to simplify approvals for research institutions, pharmaceutical and biomedical industries. Updated on: Oct 26, 2026, 14:54:47 IST By Jasjeev Gandhiok Prefer HTPrefer HT Prefer HT on Google Share The Centre’s draft rules governing animal experimentation have triggered concerns among animal rights groups, which say the changes could weaken independent oversight and make it easier for laboratories to conduct experiments on animals. However, officials maintain the changes seek to simplify approvals for research institutions, pharmaceutical and biomedical industries. Former Union minister Maneka Gandhi. Former Union minister Maneka Gandhi. HT speaks to animal rights activist and former Union minister Maneka Gandhi, a long-time campaigner against animal experimentation. Edited excerpts: A major change to animal experimentation, proposed in the draft, is that mild and moderate experiments could be approved by an institution’s own ethics committee rather than going to the central regulator. In practical terms, what does this change mean for an animal inside a laboratory? Does it make it easier for more animals to be experimented on? It means the animal loses the one independent pair of eyes that was looking at its fate. Today, experiments on animals larger than a rat go to the central regulator, and there is at least someone outside the building asking whether this experiment is necessary at all. Under the draft, the people who want to do the experiment, their colleagues and their department heads will be the ones approving it. And it is the institution itself, through its own veterinarian, that decides whether the experiment is mild or moderate in the first place. No institution has ever turned down its own funding. So yes, it will make it easier, and it will make it faster, and that means more animals. Mild and moderate are also the bulk of experiments, so we are effectively handing over most of animal experimentation in India to self regulation. The draft classifies experiments as mild, moderate, severe and non-recovery. Is there a concern that the institution conducting the research will effectively decide how severe the experiment is. Does this leave a grey area? It isn’t grey, it is completely black. Under this draft, the institution that wants to do the experiment is also the one that decides which category it falls into. That decision matters enormously, because if the experiment is classified as mild or moderate, the institution’s own committee approves it and it never goes to the central regulator. Only severe and non-recovery experiments on larger animals go outside. So the same people who want the experiment approved are deciding whether anyone independent will ever examine it. That is a clear conflict of interest, and it will push experiments towards the lower categories. Starving a rat for a day is called mild. Keeping a social animal alone in a cage is mild. Starving it for two days, or putting it through distress it cannot escape, is moderate. So is testing herbal products, testing established drugs, and anything described as having “known and reversible effects,” which could mean almost anything. This is not a scientific list. It is the most common commercial work. The draft also creates exceptions and allows laboratories to use animals from open markets, unregistered sources, and in certain circumstances, stray, feral, wild and protected animals. What is the biggest risk that this may create for animals in practice? Could community dogs, lost pets or animals taken from the wild find their way into laboratories? The biggest risk is that nobody will know where an animal came from. The whole point of registered breeders was traceability. Once you allow open markets and unregistered sources for cattle, goats, birds and fish, you create a demand, and in this country demand is met very quickly by people who will pick up anything. Strays and wild animals can be used if a “competent authority” permits it, and the draft never says who that is. Community dogs, someone’s lost pet, birds from illegal markets, all of it can find its way into a laboratory. These exceptions should be removed completely. If a lab cannot get an animal from a registered source, it should not be doing that experiment. The draft formally incorporates the principles of replacement, reduction and refinement, but critics say these safeguards become weaker if institutions themselves are approving experiments. Do you believe India should now be moving towards replacing animal experiments altogether, particularly when the health ministry has already allowed certain drug testing through non-animal methods? What should the rules do differently? Yes, and we are not starting from zero. The health ministry has already amended the drug rules to accept non-animal methods. The world is moving this way because these methods are often more predictive for humans than a mouse ever was. Writing replacement, reduction and refinement into the rules means nothing if the person checking compliance is the institution itself. The rules should make it mandatory to show that no validated alternative exists before an animal is used, set up a national body to validate and promote alternatives, put money into them, and set timelines to phase out animal use in areas where alternatives are already available. A rule that only mentions replacement as a principle is decoration. You have worked on animal experimentation regulation for decades. What specific changes would you want the government to make to this draft? I don’t think this draft can be fixed. There is hardly a provision in it that doesn’t need changing, and when everything needs to change, it is better to start again. So the draft should be put aside and written afresh, this time with independent scientists, animal welfare organisations and legal experts at the table. The new rules must take India forward, not backwards. Animals already have certain protections under the law which cannot be taken away. New should be building on them.

Orissa High Court Rules SC/ST Status Cannot Be Carried Across State Borders

Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Response to Challenge Against Chhattisgarh Anti-Conversion Law

Union Home Minister Amit Shah chaired a high-level security review meeting on Thursday in Jammu to assess preparations and threat management ahead of the Amarnath Yatra, which will take place from July 3 to August 9 this year. The meeting came amid heightened security concerns following the deadly April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam that killed 26 civilians.

The strategic review session was attended by several key figures, including Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi, Jammu & Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha, Intelligence Bureau (IB) Director Tapan Deka, J&K Police Chief Nalin Prabhat, and top leadership from the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) and local administration.

The focus of the meeting was to ensure foolproof security for the annual Hindu pilgrimage to the Amarnath shrine in south Kashmir, particularly since one of the pilgrimage routes—via Chandanwari—passes through Pahalgam, where the recent terror attack occurred.

In a coordinated effort to bolster security, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) Director General GP Singh visited the Nunwan base camp on Thursday to assess preparedness on the ground. Meanwhile, Border Security Force (BSF) chief Daljit Chawdhary reviewed security in the volatile Poonch area, which saw hostilities during Operation Sindoor earlier this month. He is also expected to inspect parts of the Amarnath Yatra route over the weekend.

Sources from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) confirmed that 581 companies of paramilitary forces will be deployed in Jammu and Kashmir for the Yatra. The deployment includes personnel from CRPF, BSF, CISF, SSB, and ITBP, with CRPF fielding the largest share at 219 companies.

The sanctioned strength of each CRPF company ranges between 120 and 130 personnel depending on the terrain and threat level. A senior CRPF official, requesting anonymity, said that over the past two days, security reviews have been conducted in both Srinagar and Jammu, including aerial surveys of the pilgrimage route.

Meanwhile, Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), tasked with shrine protection, is also ramping up its security plan. Top ITBP officials are expected to conduct their own reviews shortly.

Last year’s Amarnath Yatra saw record-breaking participation with over 512,000 pilgrims making the journey — the highest in over a decade, according to Union home ministry data. The government aims to ensure a secure and seamless experience this year, even as threats loom larger than before.

Amit Shah is scheduled to visit Poonch on Friday, where he will meet families affected by cross-border shelling during Operation Sindoor, underlining the Centre’s focus on both security preparedness and humanitarian outreach.