A long-awaited report on an audit conducted by European Union inspectors has found India needs to do more to improve its seafood inspection regime.
The report, published 8 May, makes numerous critiques of India’s system and protocols for guaranteeing the quality and safety of its seafood exports. The report was based off a visit made by inspectors in November 2017 in response to mounting concerns in Europe over the number of shipments of Indian shrimp found to contain excessive amounts of antibiotics.
Indian seafood exporters have expressed concern that the report could lead to a total ban of Indian shrimp exports to the E.U., as well as frustration that the E.U. appears to have applied special, harsher conditions to their shrimp shipments. The E.U. currently accounts for 18 percent of seafood imports from India, making it the third-largest market after the United States and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
Willem van der Pijl, the director of the Seafood Trade Intelligence Portal (STIP), which has played a role in aiding dialogue between Indian exporters and government authorities and the E.U. and European buyers, said his impression is that the report was more negative than expected.
“I must say that I am, myself, slightly surprised by the fact that the report does not only include negative conclusions on the level of control on primary production but also on the overall manpower of the Indian institutions and the level of cooperation between the various institutions [and] incomplete follow-up of recommendations of the 2014 audit,” van der Pijl wrote on the STIP website. “In general, the report is a bit more negative than I had expected based on earlier news from Indian and E.U. sources. However, the recommendations at the end of the report seem to be rather limited compared to the number of negative conclusions throughout the report.”
The inspectors found that India’s existing legislation and control should be capable of providing adequate assurance that its exports meet the E.U.’s requirements “if implemented as foreseen.”
However, shortcomings in regard to India’s inspection system for domestic aquaculture, which in many instances share the same water and streams as farms providing material for export, were of concern to the E.U. inspectors. In addition, India’s registration and inspection regime for its fishing vessels and landing sites falls short of full compliance with existing legislation, the report said. And cooperation between India’s fishing authorities and the recording of inspections “are not sufficient to ensure full compliance,” it said.
The report called for more staffing at the Export Inspection Council and the Marine Products Exports Development Authority, and for more fishing vessel inspections. And it found deficiencies in several cold storage facilities, including incorrect temperature registration, high temperatures, and inadequate storage – none of which had been detected by Indian authorities.
“The … shortcomings undermine the reliability of the guarantees provided, and attested to by the [competent authorities], that fishery products exported to the E.U. were produced in accordance with the E.U. rules and in E.U.-compliant establishments,” the report said.
The report does not make any conclusions or recommendations as to what actions the E.U. should take in potentially limiting Indian seafood exports in the future. The European Commission is not expected to take any such action until the publication of the results of the Risk Management Plan audit carried out in April 2017.
“So we will have to wait for that,” van der Pijl wrote.
Photo courtesy of MPEDA
