Page 138 - CW E-Magazine (4-3-2025)

Top Stories

AGROCHEMICALS

Legal clarity needed on responsibility for MRL adherence

in pesticides: CCFI

The Food Safety and Standards to the minimum period that must Key policy recommendations
Authority of India (FSSAI), under the elapse between the last pesticide The Crop Care Federation of India
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, application and crop harvest. This inter- (CCFI) has called for joint action by the
recently organised a National Stake- val ensures that pesticide residues on Central Insecticides Board & Registra-
holder Consultation on Challenges in produce remain within safe limits for tion Committee (CIB&RC) and FSSAI
Monitoring Pesticide Residue in Food human consumption. PHI is crucial to address regulatory gaps. Many crops,
Commodities in New Delhi. as it allows enough time for pesti- such as papaya, pearl millet (ragi),
cide residues to break down naturally, drumstick, and curry leaves, lack
Recognising the importance of the reducing the risk of MRL violations. offi cially registered pesticides or estab-
event, the Crop Care Federation of Strict adherence to PHI can prevent lished MRLs. When these crops face
India (CCFI) presented a position paper export rejections due to excessive pest infestations, farmers have no clear
to Dr. Alka Rao, Advisor (Science, pesticide residues. Ensuring compli- guidance on pesticide use, potentially
Standards, and Regulations), National ance benefi ts farmers, exporters, and leading to non-compliance with food
Codex – SPS Contact Point, FSSAI, the agricultural trade by maintaining safety norms. The long-pending crop
highlighting critical concerns affect- product integrity and market accep- grouping initiative, fi rst proposed in
ing the pesticide industry. tance. 2015, has yet to be implemented, leaving
MRL determinations incomplete.
Legal framework governing “Farmers must be made aware of
pesticide use the importance of PHI. Proper imple- According to CCFI, FSSAI must
Section 38(1)(a) of the Insecti- mentation can signifi cantly reduce ensure that sanitary and phytosanitary
cides Act, 1968, explicitly states that pesticide residue violations, ensur- (SPS) measures apply equally to both
the Act does not regulate the use of ing food safety and enhancing India’s domestic and imported food/feed com-
insecticides by individuals on their own global agricultural trade reputation,” modities, as per the WTO’s SPS Agree-
cultivated land. Similarly, the Food said Ms. Pathrawal. ment. Countries such as the EU and the
Safety and Standards (FSS) Act does USA frequently reject Indian exports
not impose legal control over pesticide Role of FSSAI over MRL violations, whereas there
use by farmers on their own fi elds. Pesticide residues are classifi ed is no record of FSSAI rejecting any
This legal gap raises the question of as crop contaminants under the Food imported food/feed product for similar
who holds responsibility for adhering Safety and Standards (Contaminants, concerns. This raises concerns about
to Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs). Toxins, and Residues) Regulations, inconsistent regulatory enforcement.
2011. These are substances not inten-
Ms. Nirmala Pathrawal, Executive tionally added to food but present Greater awareness
Director, CCFI, emphasised the need due to agricultural or environmental During the consultation, CCFI
for legal clarity, stating, “The existing factors. emphasised the need to educate stake-
regulatory framework does not clearly holders about PHI and its role in
defi ne who is responsible for ensur- Additionally, Section 18(3) of ensuring food safety and compliance
ing MRL compliance – farmers, tra- the FSS Act, 2006, exempts farming with MRLs. “A collaborative approach
ders, or regulatory authorities. With- operations, crops, and farm-level pro- between policymakers, regulators,
out clear accountability, both domestic duce from its provisions. This means and industry stakeholders is crucial to
food safety and export standards are that standing crops in fi elds, whether ensure a robust, fair, and transparent
at risk.” pre- or post-harvest, are not classifi ed system for monitoring pesticide resi-
as food under the FSS Act. Food safety dues. We must bridge the regulatory
Understanding the pre-harvest inspectors have no legal authority to gaps to safeguard both consumer health
interval (PHI) collect crop samples directly from and farmer interests,” Ms. Pathrawal
Pre-harvest interval (PHI) refers farmers’ fi elds. concluded.

138 Chemical Weekly March 4, 2025

Contents Index to Advertisers Index to Products Advertised