By Julius Peter
The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) has clarified that it does not have direct and absolute regulatory oversight over unbranded palm oil, fufu and other traditionally packaged staple foods sold in open markets.
The Director-General of the agency, Prof. Mojisola Adeyeye, made the clarification on Monday while briefing journalists on NAFDAC’s efforts to combat counterfeit, adulterated, substandard and potentially unsafe products in circulation across the country.
Adeyeye’s remarks come amid growing public concern over the safety of food products following a series of reports and claims on social media alleging the adulteration of various foods, including palm oil, yoghurt, fruits, soy sauce, olive oil, chicken, fish, water and beverages.
According to the NAFDAC boss, the agency takes reports of potentially harmful products seriously, but warned against drawing definitive conclusions about the safety or authenticity of products based solely on social media reports.
She said scientific investigation, laboratory analysis and regulatory procedures remained necessary to establish whether a product was actually adulterated, counterfeit or unsafe.
Adeyeye disclosed that NAFDAC received 225 complaints concerning suspected counterfeit products in August, while the agency receives more than 200 complaints from Nigerians every month through its various reporting channels.
“We received over 200 complaints from Nigerians monthly; in August, we received 225 calls through the NAFDAC complaint channel,” she said, according to reports of the briefing.
The complaints, she explained, provide leads that can be assessed by the agency and, where necessary, subjected to further investigation and enforcement action.
Adeyeye urged Nigerians to report suspected counterfeiters and unsafe products through NAFDAC’s official complaint channels instead of relying exclusively on social media to draw attention to suspected violations.
She stressed that counterfeit and substandard products were not produced or sold by invisible operators but by people operating within communities, neighbourhoods, markets and business premises.
“Counterfeiters are not ghosts; they exist within our communities, neighbourhoods, and business premises,” she said.
The clarification on palm oil and fufu highlights a significant challenge in Nigeria’s food-safety system: the difficulty of regulating food products that are produced, processed, packaged and sold through informal or traditional channels.
NAFDAC’s regulatory responsibilities primarily cover processed and packaged food products and include establishment inspection, product sampling, laboratory analysis, compliance monitoring, post-market surveillance, investigation of complaints, product verification, recalls and enforcement.
However, traditionally packaged staple foods sold without formal branding or registration in open markets may fall outside the agency’s direct regulatory reach.
Adeyeye said NAFDAC therefore does not have “direct and absolute regulatory oversight” over unbranded palm oil, fufu and other staple foods packaged traditionally and sold in open markets.
The position does not mean that such foods are automatically regarded as unsafe or that the agency is unconcerned about their safety. Rather, it points to the division of regulatory responsibilities among government institutions and the limits of NAFDAC’s statutory mandate.
Adeyeye consequently called on sub-national governments and other relevant authorities to strengthen monitoring and enforcement within their respective jurisdictions.
Despite the regulatory limitations, the NAFDAC chief raised concerns about reports of palm oil adulteration, particularly products sold in traditional forms in open markets.
She said the agency had observed concerns over the adulteration of palm oil with azo dyes and other hazardous contaminants.
The development is significant because palm oil is a major component of the Nigerian diet and is widely consumed across the country. It is sold through formal supermarkets and packaged brands as well as through traditional markets, roadside outlets and other informal channels.
The agency’s warning therefore places renewed attention on the need for consumers to exercise caution when buying food products whose source, processing conditions and handling cannot easily be established.
At the same time, NAFDAC cautioned against treating allegations as established facts without laboratory confirmation.
This distinction is particularly important in an era when claims about contaminated food can spread rapidly through social media, potentially causing panic among consumers and economic losses for legitimate producers and traders.
Adeyeye also drew attention to reports concerning the production of fufu and other staple foods using chemicals that could be harmful to human health.
“Fufu and other staple foods are also reported to be produced by adding bleach and other chemicals injurious to human health,” she said.
The disclosure has raised questions about the safety of traditional food-processing practices and the need for stronger oversight at the local level.
Fufu is a widely consumed staple in Nigeria and is produced through traditional processing methods involving fermentation and other stages before it reaches consumers.
Where chemicals are allegedly introduced into the production process, experts and regulators would need to establish through appropriate scientific analysis whether such substances are present, at what concentrations, and whether they pose a health risk.
NAFDAC’s position suggests that addressing such concerns cannot rest solely with the federal regulator. State and local authorities, market associations, food producers, consumer groups and other relevant institutions also have roles to play in ensuring that food sold to the public is safe.
The agency’s latest position comes as it intensifies nationwide efforts against fake, falsified, substandard and non-compliant products.
NAFDAC recently disclosed that its routine and proactive post-market surveillance operations conducted between May and July covered all 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory.
During the period, the agency said its officials visited 6,233 facilities and removed 7,210 suspected fake, falsified, substandard and non-compliant products from circulation.
Food and water products accounted for 3,633 of the products removed, while drugs and herbal products accounted for 2,459.
The agency said about 80 per cent of its post-market surveillance activities were directed at detecting and curbing fake, falsified, substandard and non-compliant products.
Adeyeye said the fight against counterfeit and unsafe products could not be left to NAFDAC alone, stressing the need for cooperation between government agencies, businesses and members of the public.
The NAFDAC boss also clarified that some products mentioned in recent reports do not fall exclusively within NAFDAC’s regulatory mandate.
She cited imported agricultural produce such as apples, grapes and oranges, explaining that the Nigeria Agricultural Quarantine Service (NAQS) has responsibilities relating to such products.
The clarification points to the need for closer coordination among agencies operating at different stages of the food-safety chain.
Adeyeye referenced the National Policy on Food Safety and Quality and its 2023 implementation plan as frameworks for strengthening inter-agency cooperation.
She also said NAFDAC had been addressing concerns over the unethical ripening of fruits since 2018 through restrictions on the availability of calcium carbide, public enlightenment and engagement with relevant stakeholders.
The latest disclosure has renewed debate over how Nigeria can effectively regulate food products moving through the informal economy.
Open markets remain a major source of food for millions of Nigerians, while a significant proportion of agricultural and traditionally processed foods reach consumers without conventional packaging, labelling or formal registration.
For consumers, the challenge is often determining where a product originated, how it was processed, whether it was exposed to contaminants and whether harmful substances were introduced during production or storage.
For regulators, the sheer size and informality of the market can make systematic inspection and laboratory surveillance difficult.
NAFDAC’s call for sub-national authorities to strengthen monitoring therefore puts greater responsibility on state and local governments to work with market associations, food processors and other stakeholders.
While government agencies have the primary responsibility for establishing and enforcing food-safety standards, NAFDAC has urged consumers to play a role by reporting suspicious products and activities.
The agency said its complaint channels, including its 24-hour call centre, provide avenues through which Nigerians can alert regulators to suspected violations.
The agency’s published contact information lists 0700-1-NAFDAC (0700-1-623322) for enquiries and 0800-1-NAFDAC (0800-1-623322) for complaints.
The agency has also cautioned that consumers should avoid relying solely on unverified social-media claims when deciding whether a food or other regulated product is unsafe.
The controversy surrounding palm oil and fufu ultimately underscores a broader issue in Nigeria’s food-safety system: protecting consumers requires more than the activities of one regulatory agency.
While NAFDAC regulates products within its statutory mandate, other federal agencies, state governments and local authorities have responsibilities covering different aspects of food production, agricultural imports, markets and public health.
Adeyeye’s comments therefore amount to a call for a more coordinated approach to food safety, particularly for products produced and sold outside the formal manufacturing and distribution system.
For consumers, the immediate message is one of caution rather than panic: allegations of adulteration should be reported and investigated, but claims should not automatically be treated as scientific evidence of contamination.
For government, however, the concerns raise a more fundamental question — how can Nigeria ensure that the food consumed daily by millions of citizens is subject to effective safety monitoring regardless of whether it is sold in a supermarket, a registered food outlet or an open market?
Until that regulatory gap is adequately addressed through stronger coordination and market surveillance, traditionally processed and unbranded foods will remain a difficult frontier in Nigeria’s efforts to guarantee food safety.
