New Delhi, Nov 6 Animal rights activists have flagged potential gaps in the Centre’s proposed rules governing laboratory animal experimentation, warning that allowing institutional committees to approve certain experiments without prior central scrutiny could weaken regulatory oversight and leave animals vulnerable to unnecessary suffering.
At a press conference held this week at Delhi’s Connaught Place, legal advocates, animal welfare activists and representatives from scientific and veterinary backgrounds called for a more stringent regulatory framework, arguing that India must move towards scientifically validated alternatives to animal testing rather than continue relying on animal models without adequately examining their necessity.
The proposed Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Control and Supervision of Experiment, Breeding and Trading of Laboratory Animals) Rules, 2026, seek to replace the existing 1968 and 1998 rules governing the breeding, trading and use of animals for experiments. The draft lays down provisions for the registration of establishments, approval of experiments, animal care and monitoring, and adherence to the internationally recognised principles of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement (3Rs).
A key concern raised by the activists was the proposed approval mechanism, under which institutional animal ethics committees (IAECs) would be empowered to approve experiments classified as mild and moderate without referring them to the central Committee for Control and Supervision of Experiments on Animals (CCSEA).
Dr Asher Jesudoss, director of Aloha Ahimsa Foundation and a member of the Delhi Animal Welfare Board’s executive committee, said such an arrangement could compromise independent scrutiny, particularly when institutions conducting experiments would also have a role in assessing their ethical acceptability.
In an official statement, he called for stronger central oversight, enforceable requirements for anaesthesia and pain relief, stricter restrictions on exemptions, transparent disclosure of experimentation data and mandatory consideration of alternatives before experiments are approved.
Questioning the scientific reliability of animal models, Jesudoss said approximately 90 per cent of drugs entering human clinical trials fail to secure approval despite undergoing preclinical testing, which often involves animal experiments.
Citing a 2024 review, he said only 5 per cent of the animal-tested treatments examined in the study received regulatory approval, clarifying that the finding did not represent the overall failure rate of animal experiments.
“Just because a substance is found safe in an animal model does not mean it will necessarily be safe for humans. India needs to invest aggressively in human-relevant alternatives, including organ-on-chip technology, organoids, human-cell-based research, artificial intelligence and computer modelling,” Jesudoss said.
The debate also centred on whether the 3Rs principle was being meaningfully implemented or merely incorporated into regulatory language.
Advocate Punita Jha, chairperson of Ojuswani Foundation, said the principle must translate into concrete obligations for research institutions, with replacement of animals wherever scientifically validated alternatives are available, reduction in the number used where experiments remain necessary, and refinement of procedures to minimise pain and distress.
“Scientific innovation should never come at the cost of unnecessary animal suffering. We need stronger regulatory accountability, ethical alternatives and a commitment to the principles of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement,” Jha asserted.
Other members raised concerns over the traceability of animals used in laboratories, warning that inadequate documentation and monitoring could create avenues for illegal procurement and trafficking, including that of wildlife. They also questioned the continued use of invasive procedures in areas where in-vitro methods and reconstructed human tissues could provide viable alternatives.
From a veterinary and public health perspective, veterinary student and animal rights activist Sakruddin Sheikh flagged the risks associated with laboratory handling of viruses, bacteria and other infectious agents. He said that inadequate containment, human error and weak biosafety protocols could expose laboratory personnel, animals and surrounding communities to biological hazards, underlining the need for stronger biosecurity and disease surveillance.
The participants called for wider stakeholder consultation, independent inspections, transparent reporting and greater public investment in alternatives before the proposed rules are finalised.
(PTI News)
