SC urges front-of-pack warning labels on packaged food

The Supreme Court on Thursday said it is concerned about the health of people, especially growing children, and wants all concerned with food safety to consider in “national interest” the issue of front-of-pack warning labels for packaged products containing high salt, sugar and fat products. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran said it will pass a detailed order calling for some information from the stakeholders on the “serious matter”.

“We are only concerned about the health of people, especially growing children. We want all the concerned to consider the cause in national interest,” the bench said, while indicating that the order will be uploaded in a day or two. The top court said it has also done some homework on the issue and asked the parties to study the order to be uploaded and posted the matter for hearing on September 28.

During the brief hearing on the plea filed by a public charitable trust, ‘3S and Our Health Society ', the bench told the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) that the contents on packaged food products are always there on the rear side of the packet but has the authority laid down any guidelines whether, if the content exceeds this limit, then it’s high in sugar or salt or fat?

Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the FSSAI, said internationally there are two conditions required to be put on the rear side of the packet.

The content has to be shown on the quantity of 100 grams and the quantity per serving, he submitted.

Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, appearing for an intervenor, said the government was putting “Kurkure” snack product on the same pedestal as other nutritional food like eggs and salted cashew. He said ultra-processed food must have a higher warning.

“Red is for non-vegetarian and green is for vegetarian. So instead of red if some other colour can be used for a warning label in case of ultra-processed food items,” he submitted.

The bench took his suggestions on record and said it would pass an order, which will be uploaded in a day or two.

Earlier, the FSSAI has told the top court that it has proposed to provide a prominent front-of-pack warning label in red colour for food products which are high in added saturated fat, sugar and salt.

In a compliance affidavit filed in the apex court, the FSSAI said the proposal is intended to provide a simple, prominent and easily comprehensible warning to consumers regarding food products which are high in specified nutrients of concern.

“It is proposed to provide a prominent front-of-pack warning label in a red-coloured hexagonal shape for food products which are high in any two or more of the following nutrients of concern, namely added saturated fat, added sugar and salt, based on the thresholds specified under the Dietary Guidelines for Indians, 2024 issued by ICMR-NIN,” the affidavit has said..

It said the warning label shall indicate the applicable declarations, such as “High Fat”, “High Sugar”, “High Salt” and/or “Highly Sweetened Beverage”, as the case may be, to enable consumers to readily identify products high in the specified nutrients.

The affidavit was filed in compliance with the apex court’s August 13 order passed while hearing a plea of public charitable trust ‘3S and Our Health Society’.

The petitioner, represented by advocate Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, has sought directions to the Centre, states and Union territories to implement mandatory front-of-package warning labels (FOPL) on packaged foods.

On August 13, the top court, while directing the Centre to decide on the visual appearance of the Front-of-Package-Labelling on pre-packaged food products, asked whether India should remain an underdeveloped country.

The court had said it does not approve the Union government’s stance that it is not possible to match international standards, particularly those of developed countries.

Front-of-package labelling (FOPL) is a nutritional information graphic on food packaging that can assist consumers in making an informed decision about food purchases and healthier dietary choices.

The court has said FOPL was necessary to create awareness, especially among growing children who are increasingly getting addicted to junk food.

It slammed the FSSAI for the delay in introducing warning labels on packaged foods, pointing out that obesity has been recognised as a public health challenge in India.

It further asked the Union of India to consult experts and arrive at a decision on the visual appearance (coloured indicators, interpretive words, numbers, letters or symbols, numerical information, percentage) of the FOPL.

“If the Union does it on its own, well and good. Otherwise, we shall proceed to pass further directions,” the bench said sternly, giving the government two weeks to place the final decision on record.

The FSSAI affidavit later told the court it is proposed that front-of-pack nutrition labelling (FoPNL) be implemented in phases to facilitate consumer acceptability and provide industry adequate time for reformulation.

It said that while phase I would cover products high in two or more specified nutrients -- added fat, added sugar and salt -- and specified sweetened beverages, phase II would extend the warning to products high in any one of these nutrients.