Foodlaw-Reading
Dr David Jukes, The University of Reading, UK
|
|
Commission Health and Food Safety Newsletter, 29 May 2020
 |
2019 Annual Report - The EU Food Fraud Network and the Administrative Assistance and Cooperation System A copy of the report is available on this site (click on image). |
The Commission has published the 2019 annual report of the EU Food Fraud Network and the System for Administrative Assistance and Food Fraud (AAC-AA and AAC-FF). The report highlights examples of EU coordinated cases as well as statistics on suspected cases food fraud through the Administrative Assistance and Cooperation System (the AAC-FF System). Among the findings, there was a steady increase in the number of requests for administrative assistance within the Food Fraud Network which confirms that, over years, cooperation in Europe between Member States has strengthened.
The following is the Introduction from the report:
This annual report presents the EU Food Fraud Network activities in 2019. The report highlights examples of EU coordinated cases as well as statistics for requests for cooperation and voluntary exchange of information on suspected cases food fraud through the Administrative Assistance and Cooperation System (the AAC-FF System).
It is worth noting that in December 2019, the new Regulation on Official Controls1 (OCR) entered into force, replacing Regulation 882/2004. As one of the legal acts foreseen by the OCR, the Integrated Management System for Official Controls (IMSOC) Regulation2 was also adopted. The new OCR updates agri-food chain controls, improves the protection of customers against fraudulent practices and clarifies what suspicion of food fraud means.
What is food fraud? Fraudulent activities are characterised by their intentional nature, including the aim to make an economic gain, in violation of legal rules and at the expense of the immediate customer or the final customer. These intentional fraudulent activities that breach EU agri-food chain legislation may also constitute a risk to human, animal or plant health, to animal welfare or to the environment. Four key criteria are referred to when establishing if a case should be considered as fraud or as non-compliance: (i) violation of EU rules, (ii) customer deception, (iii) economic gain, (iv) intention.
These four criteria correspond to the current rules for Member States to report frauds:
1. Violation of EU rules: this criterion entails a violation of one or more rules codified in the EU agri-food chain legislation as referred to in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/625.
2. Customer deception: this criterion entails deceiving consumer/customer (for example by altering the colouring or the labelling of a product, which hides its true quality). The deceptive element may also pose a public health risk as some of the properties of the product are hidden (for example, undeclared allergens).
3. Economic gain: this criterion brings some form of direct or indirect economic advantage for the perpetrator.
4. Intention: this criterion is based on elements that give strong grounds to believe that the non-compliances are not coincidental. For example, substituting high quality ingredients with lower quality ingredients, which often implies fraudulent intent.
The ability to recognise fraudulent activity presents a challenge, not only due to the various forms it can take, but also owing to the need to distinguish deliberate acts from accidental or unintentional ones, which could equally affect food safety or food quality. A more extreme aspect, that has implications for security, is the intentional adulteration ideologically motivated to harm through bio-terrorism.
