Following Bangladesh’s independence, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman shared his vision for food and nutrition security for the people of Bangladesh. “We must work hard with our farmers to revolutionize agriculture, not even an inch of our land should remain untilled and unused,” he said in his historic address on February 20, 1972.
Recognizing that making available safe food is equally important, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina spearheaded the enactment of the Food Safety Act in 2013 followed by the establishment of Bangladesh Food Safety Authority (BFSA) in 2015. With this, the government underscored the point that unsafe food is not food.
But where was the need to do this when Bangladesh already had a national level organization -- the Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI) -- established in 1971 with the mandate to set standards for everything including food products? It was Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina who emphasized public health through food quality and safety. During the National Food Safety Day Conference in 2018, she announced that BFSA needs to augment its human resources with appropriate experts, and that their laboratories be strengthened, which is reflected in the 8th Five Year Plan (2020-2025).
Food safety is the lynchpin of international trade. While food imports were around $9.6 billion (FY23), the export of food products was just about $1.16bn (FY22) despite Bangladesh being a strong agri-based economy. If exports are low and imports surge, it is the domestic market that suffers. This translates into an increased disease burden on the people. It is time to admit that the status of food safety is grim, and requires attention.
If one reviews the list of BSTI standards (451 quality standards for voluntary adoption), except for some items, the standards of most food products were set 20-60 years ago and never revised. Only 76 food items are under compulsory testing by BSTI. Secondly, standards for the safety parameters are hardly available -- except some 22 food additives and 27 pesticides. What about contaminants like heavy metals, mycotoxins, most microbiological parameters for high-risk products and residues of several other pesticides and veterinary drugs?
What is the global food safety regime and where does Bangladesh stand?
An example of regulatory failure was recently reported in the media. A study conducted by Dhaka University’s Institute of Nutrition and Food Science and BRAC University’s James P Grant School of Public Health has revealed that about 67% of bottled soybean oil contains Trans Fatty Acids (TFA) up to two to four times the WHO recommended limit of 2%, and notified by BFSA in 2021.
The most likely reason for lack of enforcement is that due to the absence of BFSA’s licensing regulations, the industry operates without fear of regulatory action. Also, possibly, TFA is not a testing parameter in the BSTI standards for palm oil and soybean oils set more than 20 years ago. TFA is recognized as detrimental to heart health and is a risk for certain cancers. Thus, such an important health matter has escaped regulatory oversight and is impacting consumers’ health.
All this raises policy questions which require effective action by the government.
Provisions of the Food Safety Act empower BFSA to ensure food safety. Section 13(1) states that BFSA is required to "regulate and monitor the activities related to manufacture, import, processing, storage, distribution and sale of food so as to ensure access [to] safe food..." Section 13(3) requires it to harmonize safety and quality standards between domestic and international food articles.
The standards adopted by Codex Alimentarius Commission are the relevant international standards and a reference point within the framework of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Thus, it is imperative that the food regulator notifies the national standards to the WTO before notifying them as regulations. Therefore, to enforce them and to stand scrutiny in a Court of Law, nationally or internationally, these must be gazette notified; BFSA has the powers under Section 13(4) to make regulations and it has already started doing so.
On the other hand, BSTI only sets standards and not regulations -- none of their standards are gazette notified. The reason is simple -- BSTI primarily sets voluntary standards. It is not a member of Codex as only a country can be a member of Codex. BSTI is a member of International Organization for Standardisation (ISO), a well-respected international NGO that adopts standards for everything including food products.
ISO (and, therefore, BSTI) standards are not a reference standard under the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary Measures (SPS), which governs international trade in safe food. This reality needs to be acknowledged as a key bottleneck in addressing food safety in Bangladesh.
To address these gaps, BFSA, under powers conferred by the Food Safety Act and as the only specialized body in the country, took upon itself the responsibility to ensure that the national food quality and safety standards are reviewed and harmonized with Codex standards to fulfil the vision of Bangabandhu, and the decisions taken by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.
With technical support from FAO, BFSA referred to the regulations in key developed and developing countries as well as standards developed by BSTI and BFSA, worked with 27 working groups comprising more than 200 experts including 36 from India, held over 125 meetings, and finalized a whopping 11,200 standards now awaiting notification in the Official Gazette. The Bangladesh Cabinet Secretary proudly announced this in March 2023. These draft standards went through the scientific process under the Food Safety Act and were notified to the WTO and are now in the final stages of becoming a part of the law in Bangladesh.
The strength of BFSA is that it has more than 100 food science experts. These young officers coordinated the entire work of harmonizing Bangladesh’s food regulations with Codex underlining their commitment to ensuring food safety in Bangladesh. Having proved their competence, it is now incumbent upon the government to take a few policy decisions.
BFSA must lead the Codex work for Bangladesh if it must regulate food quality and safety in line with international standards. Secondly, the government should further strengthen BFSA with more officers and state-of-the-art laboratories and organize their training. The BSTI and BCSIR laboratories should continue to provide the testing facilities and the role of private laboratories should be acknowledged.
A food analyst examination should also be conducted at the national level by BFSA, and the qualified food analysts should be gazette notified to provide legal backing to the regulatory work. Simultaneously, BFSA must notify the licensing regulations to fulfil its mandate under Section 13(1) of the Act. And, finally, the composition of the BFSA technical committees should be finalized urgently for subsequent work.
The irony is that BFSA has the mandate to harmonize standards, regulate and monitor food safety in Bangladesh, has qualified officers, but is not empowered to lead work on Codex. If sub-standard food continues to sell in the domestic market, food exports do not expand or end up getting rejected abroad, Bangladesh’s ambition of becoming a developed country by 2041 will remain a challenge.
My humble suggestion is that the national level institutions and ministries see the larger picture and come together for strategic consultations for coordinated work rather than working in silos.
Sanjay Dave is the former Chairman of Codex Alimentarius Commission. He can be reached at [email protected]
