India’s government on Thursday told the Supreme Court it was open to tougher red warnings on food packaging after health activists said its earlier proposal was too easy on companies, in a potential blow to the $100 billion food industry.
Stricter rules would be introduced in a second phase, it said. The nationwide debate on food safety has intensified since Reuters reported last month that India’s government opted for a weaker labelling regime after lobbying by Coca-Cola and groups backing Nestle and PepsiCo, which argued warning labels were ineffective. We expect one and all to extend their cooperation to a cause which is in national interest,” the Supreme Court said on Thursday.
After years of delays, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) last month suggested a two-phased labelling programme, starting with red-coloured hexagonal warning labels on products that exceeded limits in at least two of three categories — added sugar, salt or saturated fat. The announcement came as India’s federal and state food regulators pursued an aggressive enforcement drive, with surprise raids on eateries uncovering poor hygiene and leading to many forced closures, stoking anger among consumers. “It has to be sugar and salt. Many companies, however, have implemented such measures voluntarily in European markets. India’s food and drinks market is key for foreign players including Nestle, Unilever, Mondelez and Mars, whose food products compete in a thriving industry that also includes big Indian firms such as ITC and Dabur. On top of that, thousands of smaller businesses sell snacks and sweets, which remain hugely popular among millions of Indians. “We are concerned with the health of people, more particularly growing children. We have taken it up very seriously.
Only then will you ask them to put a label?” Pardiwala said, stressing the word “and”. The judges said they will issue a written order before Friday.
Supreme Court Justice J.B. Pardiwala questioned why the FSSAI was taking a two-phased approach, as he questioned a government lawyer during Thursday’s hearing. The FSSAI’s lawyer, Additional Solicitor General of India Brijender Chahar, responded that after hearing the court, it was now suggesting it could roll out the phases “in one go. That would effectively mean foods high even in one of the three nutrients — added sugar, salt or fat — would have a red hexagon.
Health experts criticised the FSSAI proposal, however, saying the two-nutrient approach was an “industry-friendly loophole” that disregarded public health, as many products would escape scrutiny. The Supreme Court has been hearing a plea by health group “3S And Our Health” demanding stricter labelling, drawing the FSSAI and the industry to court.
All India Food Processors’ Association, which represents dozens of Indian and foreign food giants, has called for a review of the planned health labels on packaging, saying many staples risk being covered in warnings that will tarnish the image of Indian food globally. Rising obesity rates and the consumption of fatty foods are a growing concern among health experts and the Indian government. The United States, for example, has proposed per-serve front-of-pack labelling, which Indian industry favours, though many other countries use the 100-gram benchmark. Some 450 million Indians could be obese or overweight by 2050, according to a recent study published in the Lancet medical journal.
During Thursday’s hearing, the group’s lawyer held a food packet to explain its position, saying “nobody can eat 100 grams of pickle”, and so the warning labels should be decided on a per-serve basis, not by analysing salt and sugar in 100 grams of a product as the authorities have proposed.
