ISLAMABAD: The Senate Standing Committee on National Food Security and Research on Thursday voiced strong reservations over the newly created National Agri-Trade and Food Safety Authority (NAFSA), questioning its legality, structure, and mandate.
Chairman Senator Syed Masroor Ahsan and members including Senators Saleem Mandviwalla and Aimal Wali Khan criticized the authority, formed by replacing the Department of Plant Protection (DPP) and the Animal Quarantine Department (AQD), saying it appeared to be more of a reshuffling exercise than a genuine reform. Senator Mandviwalla warned that the authority would unfairly shift responsibility onto exporters while leaving the wider food supply chain unaddressed. He said several associations had already expressed concern that NAFSA would complicate matters further instead of resolving Pakistan’s compliance issues with international markets. Senator Aimal Wali Khan questioned the lack of robust food research and quarantine facilities in Pakistan, observing that countries like Iran and Afghanistan had more effective systems. He argued that creating a new federal-level body was unlikely to fix systemic weaknesses.
The criticism follows NAFSA’s first Board of Governors meeting held on September 3, 2025, in Islamabad. According to official documents, the meeting introduced board members, approved business regulations, reviewed its organizational structure, and deliberated on establishing a permanent headquarters at NARC, Islamabad.
However, stakeholders and experts have raised serious concerns about NAFSA. They argue that by corporatizing DPP and AQD, Pakistan risks breaching obligations under the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), which require civil servants to issue phytosanitary and animal health certificates. They also point out that the eligibility criteria for NAFSA’s leadership exclude core qualifications such as entomology, plant pathology, and veterinary medicine, undermining the technical strength required for Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) compliance. Another objection is that food safety is a provincial subject under the 18th Amendment. Provinces already have food authorities and legislation in place, and establishing NAFSA without provincial resolutions risks trespassing on provincial autonomy.
Critics further note that billions of rupees will be required to establish NAFSA’s infrastructure, even though DPP and AQD already exist, albeit under-resourced. They argue that instead of creating a new authority, the government should have strengthened the existing institutions. NAFSA also has no accredited laboratories or internationally recognized certification systems and continues to rely on deputationists from other organizations, raising fears that the same compliance gaps will persist.
Since NAFSA’s establishment earlier this year through an ordinance, Pakistan has already faced over 40 interceptions of its agricultural exports by EU member states, fueling doubts about the authority’s effectiveness. While the government insists NAFSA will reduce export rejections and bring Pakistan in line with WTO, Codex Alimentarius, IPPC, and OIE standards, critics argue it risks becoming another expensive and overlapping bureaucracy detached from ground realities, leaving exporters to bear the brunt.
