A delegation of industry bodies met with Ashish Bahuguna, chairman, Food Safety & Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), recently to seek clarity in wake of the Supreme Court order upholding the Bombay High Court order holding advisories on Product Approval as null and void.
Disclosing details on the meeting, sources in the industry stated that they did not get any concrete assurance from the apex food regulator on the issue of Product Approval as the chairman told them that Product Approvals approved or rejected so far would remain so, while new ones could be considered for NOC (no objection certificate).
However, the industry is not convinced and expressing concern over the provisions under which the apex food regulator would deny or give NOC. It implies that despite the ruling, FSSAI would follow its principle, according to one industry representative privy to the development.
Several product approval applications are still pending with the apex food regulator and as per norms, FBOs have to submit Rs 25,000 as fees on each application.
In this regard, comprehensive presentation on behalf of all the associations was made on various key points like transition from PFA to FSSAI and governing principles of the new Act, current issues and challenges (industry engagement, role of vertical standards, laboratories etc.), operational concerns with regards to role of fourth sample wherein officials of the state food authority give 24 hours to appeal against sampling of the food.
Sources, meanwhile, said FSSAI chairman appeared empathic towards the industry when industry bodies were making the presentation.
During this time, the chairman told the delegation that products which were already approved should ‘Stand approved, rejected products remained rejected’ and for products in the pipeline, FSSAI is still looking for way forward.
With regard to interpretation of the Act, the chairman said that the Act and the Regulations had shortcomings which led to issues with interpretation. He sought the industry’s help to have a fresh look and suggestion on amendments.
Further, clarifying on distinction between food safety and health, the chairman stated, safety is non-negotiable, however, forming standards around health is debatable. He said that the system should promote healthier options instead of a ban.
As for reason for rejection and appeal, the chairman stated that reasons for rejection could be disclosed via checklist but the option of appeal was not available under the law.
The chairman clarified on other issues as well. On adoption of BIS & Codex standards, he mentioned that Codex standards could not be indiscriminately adopted but needed to take a selective approach based on Indian population and conditions.
On multiple licensing,he said that if duplication of licensing was occurring in states, for instance, municipal bodies licence, then FSSAI would consider the matter.On Combinatorial effect, the chairman was of the opinion that ordinary foods might not pose any risk but complex foods or specific foods could be an issue.As regards imports, the chairman suggested that past year’s data could be a basis to identify risk categories (high or low) taking into consideration country of origin of importers, nature of product and so on.
He was also open to the idea of at least having an online window facilitating the industry as a help desk.
