There is an ongoing cold war between the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), and the Nigerian Agricultural Quarantine Service (NAQS) over the use of Methyl Bromide for agricultural fumigation in Nigeria.
While NAFDAC has repeatedly said the chemical is banned in Nigeria, NAQS counters its, saying it remains permitted for quarantine use and is a requirement before certain agricultural goods can be exported to some countries; notably India and Mexico. For some reason(s), both agencies of government have failed to sit at a table and come to a joint position.
NAFDAC in a statement this week, said, “The use of Methyl Bromide as fumigant is banned and remains banned in Nigeria. Farmers, agro input dealers and exporters of Agricultural produce are advised to use alternative pesticides which are safer, cheaper and more effective.”
The agency said its attention “has been drawn to an upsurge in the demand for methyl bromide from Nigeria.” The surge in demand, according to the statement, is sequel to the new requirement of the government of some countries, such as Mexico and India, that methyl bromide must be used as fumigant on the agricultural produce being exported to their countries.
NAFDAC further said it was advising the Federal Ministry of Trade and Investment to “look into the mandatory requirement of methyl bromide fumigants as a trade impediment issue, and it should be treated as such once there are more viable alternative pesticides that are less injurious to humans and the environment.”
However, Vincent Isegbe, director general of NAQS in a phone interview to clarify the development, expressed the view that NAFDAC was overstepping its mandate. According to Isegbe, there are exemptions for the use of Methyl Bromide, and these include when it is used as a chemical in feedstuff; uses that the parties of the Montreal protocol deem “critical” under certain classifications by parties to the protocol and lastly; use for Quarantine and Pre-shipment (QPS).
In an earlier statement this year, when NAFDAC made a similar announcement of ban, NAQS said the announcement caused concern and panic among farmers and exporters who rely on Methyl bromide as a potent option for the control of certain agricultural pests.
According to Nigeria’s quarantine agency, whereas the use of methyl bromide is known to have some deleterious effect on the environment, it is acceptable for controlled quarantine use because of the lack of comparably efficacious alternatives. For example, under the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) 15, the use of Methyl bromide for the treatment of wood packaging in international trade is allowed.
While NAFDAC also highlights that the use of methyl bromide was banned by Montreal Protocol of 1987 due to its effect on ozone layer depletion property, Isegbe of NAQS says this falls under the purview of the National Ozone Office, domiciled in the Ministry of Environment.
However, both agencies appear to agree on two things. NAFDAC recognises that Methyl Bromide receives critical uses exemption from some countries, which is also emphasised by NAQS. Secondly, NAFDAC appears cautious to allow the chemical in Nigeria, based on what it describes as “the documented abuse and misuse of other agrochemicals.” The risks of use of Methyl Bromide will outweigh the benefit for critical use, NAFDAC asserts.
To the extent that chemicals are abused in Nigeria, NAQS had also stated “For the avoidance of doubt, all agro-chemicals are potentially harmful; if used contrary to their original purpose or if applied arbitrarily.”
It appears the conversation both agencies working for the same government have failed to have, is on regulation of the chemical’s usage, to avoid its potentially harmful effects, especially on humans. Industry stakeholders then wonder, why not dialogue and design a framework for this?
CALEB OJEWALE
