In
Turkey, the enforcement responsibility has, however,
recently been shifted from the Ministry of Health
to the Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Affairs
and their aforesaid food legislations/regulations
are presently in the process of being consolidated
and unified. In Pakistan the food laws are unified
into one central legislation called "The Pure
Food Ordinance, 1960" with its enforcement
left to the provincial governments within the policy
and statutory frameworks of the Central legislation.
In contrast, as per the McKinsey
Report, there are more than 20 laws relating to
food with responsibilities for their implementation
divided amongst large number of ministries and departments,
including the Ministries of Health, Food & Agriculture,
Food Processing, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs,
and Industry, etc. Health and Agriculture being
the State subjects, the actual enforcement of food
laws rest with the State Governments and Union Territories.
We have, therefore, plethora of food legislations
and enforcement agencies. For example, manufacturers
of packaged food products, like oils and vanaspati,
jams and squashes, are obligated to comply with
quality standards and label declarations prescribed
under multiple legislations, such as PFA, The Standards
of.' Weights & Measures (Packaged Commodities)
Rules, Vanaspati and Oil Products Control Orders/Fruit
Products Order, etc. Such multiplicity often results
into a food factory or establishment being visited
by a number of Inspectors from different Departments
leaving enough room for multiple harassment and
even corrupt practices. Further, such multiplicity
also leads to conflicting approach, lack of co-ordination,
administrative delays etc., thus retarding the growth
of food industry.
2. PRAGMATIC
ENFORCEMENT APPROACH:
The 'enforcement approach' in all
these east Asian countries was found to be quite
'reformative & pragmatic' rather than 'excessively
punitive'. This is evident from a few "administrative
practices" that are institutionalised and followed
in these countries with a view to tackle and resolve
the root causes of food laws related offences, rather
than embarking upon just lifting the samples and
"prosecuting the manufacturers/vendors"
on the basis of sample failure reports. Some of
these best administrative practices" are as
follows:
MALAYSIA
Administrative
Sampling:
Health Inspectors periodically
lift samples of food products from factories, super
markets or retail outlets. If their analysis reveals
any adulteration, misdeclaration or breach of prescribed
food safety and quality standards, a process of
dialogue is started by the local Health Inspector
with the manufacturer concerned to examine/analyse
the root causes of such adulteration or breach of
standards. This includes Health Inspector's visit
to the factory, examination of production facilities
and historical data, etc. An opportunity is also
given to the manufacturer to rectify the source
of such non-compliance or problem within a period
of one month except in cases where analysis reveals
serious health hazard to the public. Thereafter,
'statutory samples' are lifted by the Health Inspector
of the 'very same product' as per the prescribed
Regulations for their fresh laboratory analysis
by the Dept. of Chemistry (Ministry of Sciences).
If such 'statutory samples' are also found to be
failing in meeting the specified quality standards
or food regulations, the proceedings for seizure
of offending articles, closure of production facilities
and criminal prosecution of the accused manufacturer
are started by the FDA, as may be warranted under
the given circumstances. This administrative mechanism
clearly displays the emphasis on 'reform' approach
thus avoiding unnecessary prosecutions and consequent
waste of costs and time.
THAILAND
(a) Comparative
Sampling
FDA Authorities in Thailand place
lot of emphasis on the exercise of "pre-marketing
controls" by the local Health Authority and
Food Inspectors in their day-to-day inspections
and functioning. If a food sample is found to be
non-conforming to specified food laws and quality
standards before starting any punitive action, the
Food Inspector,, generally follow the practice of
"comparative & representative sampling"
from the factories/ departmental stores/retail outlets
in order to cross-check the laboratory analysis
results of the first sample. If the analysis of
such "comparative samples" reveals proper
compliance with the specified food standards, the
adverse analysis report of the first sample is ignored
and no punitive action is taken. This novel administrative
practice ensures fairness, transparency and checks
the potential abuse of prosecution power against
the food industry.
(b) Preference
for 'Horizontal Control'
In Thailand there are about 39
food articles which are standardised as "specifically
controlled food' and are subjected to 'vertical
control'. Rest of the other food products are subjected
to 'horizontal control'. This approach is broadly
followed for each major food category, such as,
fruits and vegetables based products, dairy products,
vegetable oils and fats, etc. This, of course, requires
the food manufacturers to use food additives, colouring
and flavouring substances, etc. within their "maximum
prescribed levels" and to follow 'codex' norms
and standards so as to ensure food safety. Such
broad-banding enforcement approach encourage the
food industry to launch new and innovative food
products beyond 39 specifically and verifically
controlled food articles.
(c) Emphasis
on Consumers' Awareness:
Further, FDA in Thailand undertakes
the launch of consumers' awareness campaigns from
time to time in print and TV media to educate the
various aspects of adulterated, substandard and
mis-branded foods which place considerable onus
and pressure on the manufacturers and traders of
food articles to comply with food quality, safety
and labelling norms. For example, FDA spent about
23 million baht on consumers awareness media campaign
called "Read Label Before Buying" during
1996-97.
INDONESIA
"Mushawara
Approach"
In Indonesia, FDA Authorities generally
follow what they call "mushawara approach"
i.e. a consultative and collaborative approach with
the food industry. In case of failure of food sample,
the Food Inspector would first visit the factory
and examine the historical data about the quality,
hygiene, standards, etc. and try to find out the
possible reasons for non-compliance of quality or
prescribed food safety standards for their correction.
Prosecution cases are booked in rare cases only
involving serious health hazards or deaths,. whereas
in case of minor breaches the offending food articles
are seized and destroyed.
TURKEY
Quality
Audits of Food Factories
Food Factories are subjected to
periodical quality checks and audits by the Inspectors
from local Municipal Councils/Ministry of Health
to ensure that packed foods strictly conform to
the specified or approved quality standards. If
there is any lot or batch found to be not conforming
to such standards, the Health Authorities can direct
the factories to recall the sub-standard/adulterated
products and re-process or destroy them as may be
warranted in the best interest of public health.
Contd.. on Part 2: DISTINCTION
BETWEEN 'ADULTERATED' & 'SUB-STANDARD FOOD...
|
