2 weeks ago
Supreme Court Asks Centre to Decide on Front-of-Package Food Labels
The Supreme Court of India is a very important court that makes sure everyone follows the rules.
It told the Indian government to decide how warning labels on food packets should look.
These labels, called Front-of-Package Labels, tell people if food has too much sugar, salt, or fat.
The court wants this because many people, especially children, are getting sick from eating too much junk food.
Junk food can cause diseases like diabetes and heart problems.
The government said it was difficult to follow the same label rules as other countries.
The court did not agree and asked whether India should stay 'underdeveloped.'
Other countries like Chile, Israel, and Canada already use such labels.
The court gave the government two weeks to make a decision.
A group called '3S and Our Health Society' first asked the court to make these labels mandatory.
The Supreme Court directed the Centre to decide on the visual appearance of Front-of-Package-Labelling (FOPL) on pre-packaged food products.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran heard a PIL by '3S and Our Health Society' seeking mandatory FOPL on packaged foods.
The court rejected the Union government's argument that international packaging standards, particularly those of developed countries, cannot be matched.
The Centre has two weeks to place its final decision on FOPL on record, failing which the court may pass further directions.
The matter is listed for further consideration on September 10; the PIL highlighted that non-communicable diseases cause over 6 million deaths annually in India.
- Who
- A Supreme Court of India bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran; the Union government represented by Additional Solicitor General Brijender Chahar; and the PIL petitioner '3S and Our Health Society'.
- What
- The court directed the Centre to decide on the visual appearance of Front-of-Package-Labelling (FOPL) on pre-packaged food products and gave it two weeks to place the final decision on record.
- Where
- Supreme Court of India, New Delhi.
- When
- The PIL was heard on a Thursday in August; the Centre must respond within two weeks, and the next hearing is scheduled for September 10.
- Why
- To create consumer awareness, especially among growing children increasingly addicted to junk food, and because the right to life and the state's duty to improve public health under Articles 21 and 47 of the Constitution require it.
Court's Position
Union Government's Position
Adopting international FOPL standards
Court's Position
The court disapproved of the Union's stance, asking 'Should India remain an underdeveloped country?' and said India should match packaging standards followed by developed countries such as Chile, Israel and Canada.
Union Government's Position
The Union government, via Additional Solicitor General Brijender Chahar, submitted that it is not possible to go by international standards of packaging and that the court's suggestion on FOPL cannot be considered.
Key facts
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Bench
- Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran
- Petitioner
- 3S and Our Health Society (public charitable trust, PIL)
- Regulator involved
- Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI)
- Deadline for Centre's decision
- Two weeks from the hearing
- Next hearing
- September 10
- Countries cited for FOPL models
- Chile, Israel, Canada
- Health data cited
- NCDs cause over 6 million deaths a year; diabetes affects nearly one in four Indians
Quotes
Justice J B Pardiwala
Supreme Court Justice
“We do not approve the stance of the Union when it says it is not possible to match with international standards, more particularly, developed countries. Should India remain an underdeveloped country? That’s the question we are putting forward for the Union to consider.”
theprint.in
“Are you taking the court for a toss?”
theprint.in
Sources
Related news
Supreme Court gives FSSAI last chance on warning labels
Supreme Court Directs FSSAI to Implement Front-of-Package Food Labels
Supreme Court Slams FSSAI Over Packaged Food Warning Label Delay
FSSAI proposes nutrition disclosures, not warning labels, on packaged foods
Supreme Court gives food regulator two-week notice over missing labels
FSSAI Proposes Red Front-Pack Warnings For Unhealthy Foods
Supreme Court Appoints Former Orissa HC Chief Justice BCA Administrator
Supreme Court Sets Aside Tata Steel’s ₹1,007 Crore GST Notice
Supreme Court Flags Misuse in Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act
