NEW DELHI: Flagging gaps in the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India’s (FSSAI) proposed phased rollout of front-of-package labelling (FoPL) for “nutrients of concern”, such as fat, sugar and salt, the Supreme Court has sought clarification on several issues.
FoPL is a nutritional information graphic displayed on food packaging to help consumers make informed purchasing choices and adopt healthier dietary preferences.
A bench, comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K Vinod Chandran, on Thursday asked FSSAI to explain why it had proposed a combined, composite or singular hexagon for two or more nutrients of concern instead of separate and distinct hexagons for each nutrient.
Noting that children face an acute risk of developing unhealthy eating behaviours, the bench asked the Centre to explain how it planned to improve nutritional literacy in schools.
“In connection with this, we would like the Union to respond on how schools plan to incorporate through curriculum, initiatives, workshops etc., the manner in which information provided in packaged food items, including nutritional information, FoPL etc., must be interpreted, and other aspects relating to nutritional literacy,” the bench said in its order.
“In recognition of the vulnerable position that children are in vis-à-vis impulse or uninformed dietary decision-making, we are of the view that some action must be taken in this regard,” it added. Flagging gaps in FSSAI’s proposal for hexagon-shaped warning labels on packaged foods high in sugar, salt and fat, the bench also sought a timeline for introducing the labels.
“Considering that an average Indian consumer is habituated to associating the colour red with non-veg ingredients, would it be necessary for FSSAI to revisit the choice of colour for the FoPL?” the bench asked.
Giving FSSAI 10 days to clarify its position, including the timeline for the rollout, the bench posted the PIL filed by ‘3S & Our Health Society’ for further hearing on September 28.
FSSAI had earlier said it proposed to introduce a prominent red front-of-package warning label for food products high in added saturated fat, added sugar and salt.
However, the top court questioned FSSAI’s proposed two-phase implementation, particularly its plan to initially cover only products high in at least two of the three nutrients — sugar, salt and fat — instead of all products high in any one of them.
“Assessment of consumer acceptability or giving the industry adequate time for reformulation cannot be reason enough for this uncertainty in time. Therefore, a reasonable, scientifically justified and clearly defined timeline or transitionary period which divides the two-phases must be indicated, for the approach of FSSAI to be a workable one,” it said.
