Legal clarity needed on responsibility for MRL adherence in pesticides: CCFI

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, recently organized a National Stakeholder Consultation on Challenges in Monitoring Pesticide Residue in Food Commodities at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi.

Recognizing the importance of the event, the Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI) presented a position paper to Dr. Alka Rao, Advisor (Science, Standards, and Regulations), National Codex–SPS Contact Point, FSSAI, highlighting critical concerns affecting the pesticide industry.

Legal Framework Governing Pesticide Use

Pesticide Usage Under the Insecticides Act, 1968, Section 38(1)(a) of the Insecticides Act, 1968, explicitly states that the Act does not regulate the use of insecticides by individuals on their own cultivated land. Similarly, the Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Act does not impose legal control over pesticide use by farmers on their own fields. This legal gap raises the question of who holds responsibility for adhering to Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs).

Ms. Nirmala Pathrawal, Executive Director, CCFI, emphasized the need for legal clarity, stating, ″The existing regulatory framework does not clearly define who is responsible for ensuring MRL compliance—farmers, traders, or regulatory authorities. Without clear accountability, both domestic food safety and export standards are at risk.″

Understanding the Pre-Harvest Interval (PHI)

Pre-Harvest Interval (PHI) refers to the minimum period that must elapse between the last pesticide application and crop harvest. This interval ensures that pesticide residues on produce remain within safe limits for human consumption. PHI is crucial as it allows enough time for pesticide residues to break down naturally, reducing the risk of MRL violations. Strict adherence to PHI can prevent export rejections due to excessive pesticide residues. Ensuring compliance benefits farmers, exporters, and the agricultural trade by maintaining product integrity and market acceptance.

Ms. Pathrawal further stressed, ″Farmers must be made aware of the importance of PHI. Proper implementation can significantly reduce pesticide residue violations, ensuring food safety and enhancing India’s global agricultural trade reputation.″

Role of FSSAI in Pesticide Residue Monitoring

Pesticide residues are classified as crop contaminants under the Food Safety and Standards (Contaminants, Toxins, and Residues) Regulations, 2011. These are substances not intentionally added to food but present due to agricultural or environmental factors. Additionally, Section 18(3) of the FSS Act, 2006, exempts farming operations, crops, and farm-level produce from its provisions. This means that standing crops in fields, whether pre- or post-harvest, are not classified as food under the FSS Act. Food safety inspectors have no legal authority to collect crop samples directly from farmers’ fields.

Key Policy Recommendations

The Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI) has called for joint action by the Central Insecticides Board & Registration Committee (CIB&RC) and FSSAI to address regulatory gaps. Many crops, such as papaya, pearl millet (ragi), drumstick, and curry leaves, lack officially registered pesticides or established MRLs. When these crops face pest infestations, farmers have no clear guidance on pesticide use, potentially leading to non-compliance with food safety norms. The long-pending crop grouping initiative, first proposed in 2015, has yet to be implemented, leaving MRL determinations incomplete.

FSSAI must ensure that sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures apply equally to both domestic and imported food/feed commodities, as per the WTO’s SPS Agreement. Countries such as the EU and the USA frequently reject Indian exports over MRL violations, whereas there is no record of FSSAI rejecting any imported food/feed product for similar concerns. This raises concerns about inconsistent regulatory enforcement.

CCFI’s Call for Greater Awareness

During the consultation, CCFI emphasized the need to educate stakeholders about PHI and its role in ensuring food safety and compliance with MRLs. The meeting was attended by Dr. J.C. Majumdar, Chief Scientific Advisor, and Mr. Harish Mehta, Senior Advisor, CCFI, who reinforced these critical industry concerns.

Ms. Pathrawal concluded, ″A collaborative approach between policymakers, regulators, and industry stakeholders is crucial to ensure a robust, fair, and transparent system for monitoring pesticide residues. We must bridge the regulatory gaps to safeguard both consumer health and farmer interests.″