Hardly any enforcement of the Consumers' Rights Protection Law
Monday, 19 April 2010
Shamsul Huq Zahid
It took decades for the national parliament to pass a law meant to protect the rights of the consumers. For governments, constitutional or otherwise, that occupied the seat of power until the last one, which is known as military-backed caretaker administration, did display, at least publicly, their utmost sincerity to establish consumers' rights. They prepared lots of draft of consumer protection laws, discussed the same at different levels and finally pushed them under the rugs for reasons best known them.
The council of advisers of the last caretaker government approved the Consumers' Rights Protection Law, which was later promulgated as an ordinance by the President. Fortunately, the Awami League-led grand alliance government that took over the rein of the country's administration following the election held on December 29, 2008 felt the need for protecting the consumers from adulterators, profiteers, swindlers etc., and the present parliament passed the law in question on April 01 last year. And under the law an organization, named, the National Consumers Protection Department (NCRPD) was created later.
As far as enforcement of the law is concerned, the administration has shown its usual indifference. One year five days after its adoption, the law was first enforced on April 06 last when NCRPD officials realized a paltry amount of fines from the owners of a few shops at a Mohammadpur market in the capital city for selling goods without price tags.
Selling goods without price tags is a punishable offence, no doubt. But the consumers are not much disturbed by the absence of price tags. There are far more serious offences being committed by traders of goods and services, putting physical safety and security of consumers at risk. Unfortunately, the administration has not been able to punish even one trader involved in such criminal acts one year after the adoption of the consumers' rights protection law.
The print and electronic media do carry reports very often how traders cheat unsuspecting consumers, in terms of both price and physical safety. But what matters most is not money but physical safety.
Adulteration of food items is quite an old practice. But the offence used to be committed in a limited scale during pre and post 1971 days. But the problem has now become so serious and extensive that the consumers are finding it difficult to differentiate between 'pure' and 'adulterated' food items. Even people buying locally produced or preserved food items from posh chain stores are not sure about their purity and safety.
In recent days, in addition to adulteration, traders have picked up using harmful chemicals for ripening fruits and preserving fish, vegetables and fruits. A section of dishonest manufacturers of food items are using harmful ingredients.
Have the consumers noticed an unusual thing about the imported fruits, such as oranges, grapes and apples being sold at roadside makeshift shops and also in supermarkets? These items remain fresh for a couple of months or more during hot humid summer days. Grapes being sold by pavement vendors do no rot and no more attract flies. Is it not abnormal?
The chemicals used to keep fruits fresh for a long time keep insects and bacteria at bay. But people are consuming the same dangerous chemicals not even for once trying to find out the reason for remaining all the fruits fresh for such a long time. Allegations have it that fruits imported from abroad are treated with harmful preservatives locally.
Even manufacturers and traders of food items at the grassroots have picked up the use of harmful chemicals, including urea and formaldehyde. The traders bringing milk from the rural areas to urban centers are, reportedly, using formaldehyde as a preservative. It is an open secret that urea is being used in the production of puffed rice (muri) and molasses.
Consumers, apparently, have stopped bothering about adulteration, as the government remains indifferent to crimes being committed openly by unscrupulous traders and manufacturers of food items.
In the years 2006 and 2007, some strong actions taken against the adulterators of food items, led by a particular magistrate, drew appreciation from the consumers of Dhaka city. But as a matter of tradition, the drive lost its steam and consumers were again left at the mercy of the dishonest traders.
Now that the government has the consumers right protection law in place, people have reasons to believe that the authorities would take necessary actions against the traders and manufacturers who endanger physical safety of millions across the country.
The law in question contains adequate punitive provisions against violators of the rights of the consumers. But unless the authorities concerned are not bold enough to act against the profiteers, adulterators and hoarders, the law would not carry any meaning to the consumers. There is no dearth of good laws in the country. But their enforcement has always been a problem either for bureaucratic or political indifference or for influence peddling by vested quarters.
The protection of consumers' rights, particularly in the case of food items, would require frequent drives against dishonest traders and manufacturers and strengthening of the procedure for examination of the quality of food items.
The Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI) lacks in both manpower and physical facilities to conduct quality tests of food items. Side by side with the efforts for strengthening it, the government should establish a separate body having sufficient manpower, facilities and authority to conduct quality tests on food items randomly. It should not be confined to Dhaka city alone. Residents living in other cities and towns also being citizens of the country do deserve un-adulterated foods.
Last but not the least, the consumers do need to be better organized to raise voice against the way they are being maltreated at every place. Except for one organization, the Consumers Association of Bangladesh (CAB), no organization has come up in aid of the consumers. The CAB's performance has been well below the consumers' expectation. Consumers' rights issues are not projected befittingly as being done in the case of issues relating to environment and human rights. Some young lawyers might consider formation of a group like that of the Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers' Association (BELA) to protect consumers' rights both inside and outside courts.
It took decades for the national parliament to pass a law meant to protect the rights of the consumers. For governments, constitutional or otherwise, that occupied the seat of power until the last one, which is known as military-backed caretaker administration, did display, at least publicly, their utmost sincerity to establish consumers' rights. They prepared lots of draft of consumer protection laws, discussed the same at different levels and finally pushed them under the rugs for reasons best known them.
The council of advisers of the last caretaker government approved the Consumers' Rights Protection Law, which was later promulgated as an ordinance by the President. Fortunately, the Awami League-led grand alliance government that took over the rein of the country's administration following the election held on December 29, 2008 felt the need for protecting the consumers from adulterators, profiteers, swindlers etc., and the present parliament passed the law in question on April 01 last year. And under the law an organization, named, the National Consumers Protection Department (NCRPD) was created later.
As far as enforcement of the law is concerned, the administration has shown its usual indifference. One year five days after its adoption, the law was first enforced on April 06 last when NCRPD officials realized a paltry amount of fines from the owners of a few shops at a Mohammadpur market in the capital city for selling goods without price tags.
Selling goods without price tags is a punishable offence, no doubt. But the consumers are not much disturbed by the absence of price tags. There are far more serious offences being committed by traders of goods and services, putting physical safety and security of consumers at risk. Unfortunately, the administration has not been able to punish even one trader involved in such criminal acts one year after the adoption of the consumers' rights protection law.
The print and electronic media do carry reports very often how traders cheat unsuspecting consumers, in terms of both price and physical safety. But what matters most is not money but physical safety.
Adulteration of food items is quite an old practice. But the offence used to be committed in a limited scale during pre and post 1971 days. But the problem has now become so serious and extensive that the consumers are finding it difficult to differentiate between 'pure' and 'adulterated' food items. Even people buying locally produced or preserved food items from posh chain stores are not sure about their purity and safety.
In recent days, in addition to adulteration, traders have picked up using harmful chemicals for ripening fruits and preserving fish, vegetables and fruits. A section of dishonest manufacturers of food items are using harmful ingredients.
Have the consumers noticed an unusual thing about the imported fruits, such as oranges, grapes and apples being sold at roadside makeshift shops and also in supermarkets? These items remain fresh for a couple of months or more during hot humid summer days. Grapes being sold by pavement vendors do no rot and no more attract flies. Is it not abnormal?
The chemicals used to keep fruits fresh for a long time keep insects and bacteria at bay. But people are consuming the same dangerous chemicals not even for once trying to find out the reason for remaining all the fruits fresh for such a long time. Allegations have it that fruits imported from abroad are treated with harmful preservatives locally.
Even manufacturers and traders of food items at the grassroots have picked up the use of harmful chemicals, including urea and formaldehyde. The traders bringing milk from the rural areas to urban centers are, reportedly, using formaldehyde as a preservative. It is an open secret that urea is being used in the production of puffed rice (muri) and molasses.
Consumers, apparently, have stopped bothering about adulteration, as the government remains indifferent to crimes being committed openly by unscrupulous traders and manufacturers of food items.
In the years 2006 and 2007, some strong actions taken against the adulterators of food items, led by a particular magistrate, drew appreciation from the consumers of Dhaka city. But as a matter of tradition, the drive lost its steam and consumers were again left at the mercy of the dishonest traders.
Now that the government has the consumers right protection law in place, people have reasons to believe that the authorities would take necessary actions against the traders and manufacturers who endanger physical safety of millions across the country.
The law in question contains adequate punitive provisions against violators of the rights of the consumers. But unless the authorities concerned are not bold enough to act against the profiteers, adulterators and hoarders, the law would not carry any meaning to the consumers. There is no dearth of good laws in the country. But their enforcement has always been a problem either for bureaucratic or political indifference or for influence peddling by vested quarters.
The protection of consumers' rights, particularly in the case of food items, would require frequent drives against dishonest traders and manufacturers and strengthening of the procedure for examination of the quality of food items.
The Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI) lacks in both manpower and physical facilities to conduct quality tests of food items. Side by side with the efforts for strengthening it, the government should establish a separate body having sufficient manpower, facilities and authority to conduct quality tests on food items randomly. It should not be confined to Dhaka city alone. Residents living in other cities and towns also being citizens of the country do deserve un-adulterated foods.
Last but not the least, the consumers do need to be better organized to raise voice against the way they are being maltreated at every place. Except for one organization, the Consumers Association of Bangladesh (CAB), no organization has come up in aid of the consumers. The CAB's performance has been well below the consumers' expectation. Consumers' rights issues are not projected befittingly as being done in the case of issues relating to environment and human rights. Some young lawyers might consider formation of a group like that of the Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers' Association (BELA) to protect consumers' rights both inside and outside courts.