Every regulatory system needs to be subject to a healthy debate to ensure that it is in sync with consumer concerns, global trends, innovation and changing industry patterns. It is important that the food regulator and the industry need to move towards a revolutionary process and bring in wholesale changes. If the stakeholders concerned can salvage a long-lasting solution, it may well be the silver lining.
End estrangement of food industry
The food industry needs to be given a seat on the table when formulating policy that impacts it and the consumers it serves. Out of a 51-member Central Committee of Food Standards, only two industry representatives are allowed to participate. The same goes for the Central Advisory Committee. Not a single representative is present on the scientific panels of FSSAI. It may be argued that industry representation has been limited in order to prevent undue influence of large MNCs and corporate lobbies; but are we saying that our regulators are not equal to the task? Clearly, having zero interface or having ad-hoc industry consultations is not the solution.
Scrap onerous regulations
Imagine the trepidation of a company which has acclimatised its R&D, production unit, internal procedures and legal processes to a prescribed set of rules and then has to tinker with the entire chain due to an ad-hoc advisory or guideline. Needless to say, these advisories may well be treated as diktats and a company has no option but to fall in line rather than be caught on the wrong foot. This is one of the most exasperating challenges faced by the industry and SMEs bear the brunt of it.
Today, every product that is to be launched in the market, including variants of an already approved product, needs to go through a product approval system. Even as this system has been followed blindly for decades, we have not yet proven its scientific validity. The FSSAI tests and approves each ingredient according to the international Codex standard. These standards prescribe the look, feel, size, gradation, storage conditions and hygiene factors of every ingredient. If these ingredients receive approval from FSSAI, there should be no issue in adding these ingredients to product variants without triggering the need for a fresh product approval process. Barring approvals of novel foods and new ingredients, most regulators in the world adhere to this system. By bringing in this change, numerous Food Business Operators (FBOs), big and small, would be spared the long drawn out process of sending in applications.
The experience of a majority of FBOs would suggest that applications are not processed in time, often taking more than a year, and applications are rejected arbitrarily without citing appropriate reasoning. This directly impacts a company's top line, as the pipeline of new products and variants stagnates. It may even act as an entry barrier for regional companies or those looking to enter new product segments.
Establish SOPs to tackle ambiguity
A set of Standard Operating Procedures can help companies understand the process to be followed by FSSAI for taking adverse actions such as product recalls, bans, cancellation of licence, etc. The responsibility of authorising such actions should be vested with the Commissioner of FSSAI rather than with junior officers. This would safeguard companies from inspector Raj, and will also help FSSAI personnel in escalating decisions to appropriate levels.
Create world-class capacity
The Bombay High Court decision brought into focus the quality and accreditations of laboratories, standards followed for testing and the procedure to be followed for referring tests. The accuracy of these results depends on these factors and forms the basis of taking action against a company. Any fallacy in reporting these results can have a severe impact on a company's reputation. There are many cases where samples have been handled in unhygienic conditions, stored improperly or tested inappropriately. In order to tackle this, a significant amount of time and money needs to be invested in the training of personnel, buying equipment and materials and putting in place a regular auditing system.
It is important to strike a balance between consumer interests and allowing the food industry to thrive in a competitive environment. The aftermath of the Maggi case and the Supreme Court ruling on product approval should push us in a direction where we are able to secure both the interests. This is easily achievable if the government, FSSAI and the industry jointly work towards bringing revolutionary reforms in the food safety and standards regulations. Filing a case against Nestle in the National Consumer Commission is a retrograde step and is not the answer. Government is equally if not more liable for breach of law if the product has been approved by the regulator.
The writer is president of the Society of Indian Law Firms