Food Safety Legislation in Pakistan:

Identifying Entry Points for Public Intervention

Mazhar Siraj

Food safety is a concern of everyone. Given that food intake is the fundamental
precondition for survival, food safety issues embrace us all the time. Food safety simply
means that what we eat, chew or drink is safe for human health. In order to ensure that
people get safe food, multidimensional approaches have to be taken at all levels of a food
chain e.g. production, storage, supply, distribution, and consumption, etc. The
government and citizens are two major stakeholders in any approach to food safety. Food
producers and food industry also play very important role in ensuring food safety, but this
is not discussed in this paper. The focus of this paper rests on the role of government and
citizens in achieving food safety through enforcement of proper legislation.

Though implementation of legislative measures is basically the mandate of the state,

citizens have also a major role to play in any legislative scheme. The state provides a
legal framework that lays down certain conditions for those involved in provision of food
to the people. These conditions may include prohibition of the sale of adulterated goods,
compliance with prescribed technical specifications, bio-safety guidelines, etc. Most of
the countries around the world have developed their own legal frameworks for ensuring
food safety, notwithstanding the effectiveness of these frameworks. Pakistan does not
have an integrated legal framework but has a set of laws, which deals with various
aspects of food safety. These laws, despite the fact that they were enacted long time ago,
have tremendous capacity to achieve at least minimum level of food safety. However,
like many other laws, these laws remain very poorly enforced.

This paper argues that, notwithstanding the financial constraints involved, the major
reason for poor enforcement of food safety laws is the lack of demand from citizens. It is
hardly any exaggeration to say that there is no public monitoring of the food safety
legislation at all. It is for this reason that relevant government authorities have had shown
little will in enforcing these laws. This paper presents a brief overview of the existing
national laws that deal with food safety. Then, the paper finds out some entry points
where citizens can play their role in making these laws more effective.

Laws Dealing with Food Safety in Pakistan

There exist a large number of food laws in Pakistan. However, most of them deal with
control of production, distribution and supply of food, in addition to dealing with
profiteering and hoarding. There are four laws that specifically deal with food safety.
Three of these laws directly focus issues related to food safety, while the fourth one
namely Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority Act, is indirectly relevant to
food safety. A brief overview of these laws is given below:

The Pure Food Ordinance, 1960 consolidates and amends the law in relation to the
preparation and the sale of foods. All provinces and some northern areas have adopted
this law with certain amendments. Its aim is to ensure purity of food being supplied to
people in the market and, therefore, provides for preventing adulteration. The law
prohibits any person to mix, colour, stain or powder any food, if the mixing involves
violation of prescribed rules or is likely to make the food injurious for health. The
prescribed rules set standards for colouring, preservatives, flavouring compounds,
antioxidants, stabilisers, anti-caking agent, non-nutritive constituents, and metals. The
law also prohibits sale, preparation, manufacture, import or export of such food for
human consumption, which is unsound, unwholesome, or injurious to health, in addition
to misbranded food items. Besides, the law sets rules for labeling of pre-packed food and
precautionary measures to be taken during storage, stocking and packing. There are four
criterion adopted by the law to ensure purity of food: a) it prohibits
manufacturing/preparation or processing of such food, which is likely to be unsafe for
human consumption, e.g. any food which can cause food poisoning; b) it prohibits
import, export or sale of unsafe food; c) sets out certain hygiene standards; d) provides
for inspection and laboratory analysis of food samples according to a set criterion. ‘Local
authority’, which is designated by the government, is responsible for enforcing the
Ordinance within its jurisdiction. The law is not uniform in all areas. Even penalties of
the same offence vary in provinces. Furthermore, the law is silent about award of
compensation or damages to consumers.

The Pure Food Ordinance 1960 does not apply to cantonment areas. There is separate law
for cantonments called “The Cantonment Pure Food Act, 1966”. There is no substantial
difference between the Pure Food Ordinance 1960 and The Cantonment Pure Food Act.
Even the rules of operation are very much similar.

In August 2003, the Federal Cabinet increased the punishment for adulterators to 25 years
imprisonment. This increase is extremely higher than the punishment provided in the
Pure Food Ordinance 1960, which ranges between imprisonment from 1 to 5 years and a
fine ranging between Rs.100 to Rs.1 lakh. Consumer Rights Commission of Pakistan
(CRCP), a national non-profit civil initiative working for articulation and protection of
consumer rights, opposed the decision on the ground that ‘it is not the stringency or
strictness of the punishment but its certainty, which ensures compliance. Authorities have
not been able to obtain convictions even under the existing laws. Increase in punishment
cannot be a substitute for an efficient and corruption-free administrative and a judicial
system, which has the capacity as well as the will to enforce the punishment sanctioned
under existing laws.”

Pakistan Hotels and Restaurant Act, 1976 applies to all hotels and restaurants in Pakistan
and seeks to control and regulate the rates and standard of service(s) by hotels and
restaurants. In addition to other provisions, under section 22(2), the sale of food or
beverages that are contaminated, not prepared hygienically or served in utensils that are
not hygienic or clean is an offense. This law does not specifically mention right to
consumers to lodge a complaint. However, this does not prevent either any person to
address a complaint to a Controller, which is appointed by the Federal Government for
enforcement of the Act. Consideration of the complaint is a matter of jurisdiction of the
Controller. Moreover, like other food laws, it does not provide for compensation to
consumers in case of damages.
The Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority Act, 1996 is a relevant law;
although it is not classified as a “food law”. This Act provides for the establishment of
Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority (PSQCA), which is the apex body to
formulate standards or adopt international standards. It is also responsible for
enforcement of standards in the whole of Pakistan and has the mandate to inspect and test
products and services, including food items, for their quality, specification and
characteristics during use, and for import and export purposes.

Entry Points for Public Intervention

Though implementation of legislative measures is basically the mandate of the state,
citizens have also a major role to play in this regard. Evidence suggests that the
relationship between public intervention and effectiveness of laws is a linear one: greater
the public intervention through monitoring, lobbying etc, higher the probability of
effective enforcement of laws. However, unfortunately, food laws in Pakistan have
attracted little public intervention. This is one major reason for the lack of will among the
concerned government authorities to effectively enforce the food laws. Following are a
few specific entry points for effective public intervention in implementation of food
safety laws.

a) Lobbying with the ‘Local Authority’

‘Local Authority’ is responsible for enforcement of the Pure Food Ordinance, 1960. It
referees to a Municipal Committee or Municipal Corporation, a Local Council, a Town
Committee or an authority, which is declared by Government by notification in the
official Gazette for the purpose of this ordinance. Concerned citizens and citizen groups
can lobby with the relevant Local Authority for effective enforcement of the law. Public
pressure is a time-tested instrument for improving government performance.

b) Registration of Complaints
There are explicit provisions for right of citizens to file complaints about quality of food
under the Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance 1960 and Cantonments Pure Food Act, 1966.
Under these laws, consumers can lodge a complaint about the quality of food being sold
in market to a Health Inspector or Food Inspector, who is appointed by the respective
Local Authority. The exercise of this right can act as an effective check on marketeers of
substandard food on one hand, and make the concerned government authorities
responsible, on the other hand. In addition, citizens can register a complaint against cases
of (a) false warranty (b) misbranded foods, and (c) incomplete labeling.

There are no express provisions for consumer complaints in the Pakistan Restaurants Act,
1976, Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 and Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority
Act, 1996. However, the laws do not prevent citizens from lodging complaints with the
concerned government officials. However, the consideration and handling of complaints
is a matter of discretion of the officials. There are various examples that responsible
officials handled such complaints for humanitarian reasons, despite that fact that law did
not bind them to do so.
The citizens can also approach consumer protection groups for such complaints. For
instance, Consumer Rights Commission of Pakistan (CRCP) has established a Consumer
Complaint and Redress Forum (CCRF), which handles consumer complaints.

c) Public Monitoring
Public monitoring of the implementation of food safety laws in general, and of certain
specific provisions of these laws in particular, can greatly contribute to effectiveness of
the existing laws. Following are the specific entry points for public monitoring of food
safety laws:

(1) Under Pure Food Ordinance 1960, private persons have the right to have food sample
analyzed. If one suspects that any food is likely to be detrimental to human health, an
application can be made in writing to a Health Inspector or Food Inspector asking him
to purchase sample of such food from the person specified in the application. The
inspector shall submit the sample to the Public Analyst for laboratory analysis. The
cost will be borne by the applicant. If the food sample is found to be adulterated, the
amount paid by the applicant will be refunded to him or her.

(2) Preparation, manufacturing, or storing for sale or for offer to sell any food which is
unhygienic or unfit for human consumption is prohibited under the Pure Food
Ordinance 1960. The citizens can monitor around them if someone is involved
preparing, manufacturing or storing for sale or for offer to sell any food, which is
likely to harm the potential consumers. The citizens have the right to register a
complaint to the inspector appointed by the concerned ‘Local Authority’.

3) Any person (i.e. waiter, cook etc.) in any hotel, restaurant, sweetmeat shop or any
other public eating place should be in possession of a health certificate from a health
officer, which should mention that he/she is free from communicable diseases. The
citizens may ask a waiter or cook at any public eating-place to produce the health
certificate. In case of failure to produce such certificate, a complaint can be made to
the Health Inspector concerned.

d) Food Safety and Right to Information

Information can play vital role in improving the capacity of government to deliver on
public issues. The citizens have the right to seek information held by government
departments and can request information under Freedom of Information Ordinance,
2002. However, this law is applicable to the Federal government and attached
departments. No province has so far enacted such legislation. However, no law either
bars citizens from requesting information, which is not classified. Certain information
produced by various government departments can be extremely useful for consumer
safety but unfortunately, such information is not made public. For instance, National
Institute of Health (NIH) and Pakistan Council for Research in Water Resources
(PCRWR) have conducted laboratory tests of bottled water brands numerous times
and found many brands unfit for human consumption but did not disclose names of
those brands. Similarly, the Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority
(PSQCA) conducted laboratory tests of edible oil and vanaspati ghee in Karachi but
 did not disclose the names of brands, which were found unfit for human consumption.
Such secretive practices render a good deal of information useless. Civil society
organizations, especially consumer groups, and concerned individuals can make
information requests to and push these public bodies and local administration to make
such information public.

Nevertheless, the list of entry points for public intervention mentioned above is not
exhaustive; the whole point is that the food safety legislation offers many
opportunities for public intervention that have not been capitalized upon so far. The
public intervention approach can substantially compliment the government efforts to
implement the food safety laws.

This paper was presented at National Food Safety Conference held in Lahore on
March 28, 2004and later published in the conference proceedings.