Posted on

TOP 5 HEALTH LAWS AND POLICY UPDATES

Dear Readers, we are happy to share the most interesting legal and policy updates concerning health industry that we read today. we hope you enjoy reading it.

1. India’s Central pollution regulator has issued a Notification extending the deadline to 31st December 2024, for submitting quarterly filings for the FY 2023-24 for all entities registered under the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Amendment Rules, 2022.
Source: bit.ly/49ahqlK

2. A District Consumer forum in the State of Maharashtra has held that the refusal of returns by a e-commerce service provider, under a blanket “no-returns” policy constituted a “unfair trade practice” and awarded compensation to consumer whose return of sub-standard product had been rejected.
Source: bit.ly/417xJxQ

3. In a recently published response to a query received by it under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the Delhi Medical Council clarified that, since only medical practitioners registered with the council and having recognized qualifications in Allopathic medicine are permitted to practice medicine in Delhi: Dentists, who are registered with the Dental Council are not licensed to perform aesthetic and cosmetic treatment which is not medically necessary.
Source: bit.ly/3ZbT0Ur

4. After considerable negotiation, India has signed the final act of the Riyadh Design Law Treaty which aims to establish protections for Industrial Design patents, the treaty specifies procedural guardrails which member states can adopt into their own local design patent protection regulations.
Source: bit.ly/3CXRxcH
Source: bit.ly/4f5AYJz

5. The United States Supreme Court has declined to hear petition by manufacturers of tobacco products, challenging the decision of the Federal Government of the United States to include graphic visual warnings on cigarette packets.
Source: bit.ly/415u1EU

Posted on

TOP 5 HEALTH LAWS AND POLICY UPDATES

Dear Readers, we are happy to share the most interesting legal and policy updates concerning health industry that we read today. We hope you enjoy reading it.

1. The National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) has directed drug manufacturers to reduce the maximum retail price (MRP) of three crucial cancer drugs i.e., Trastuzumab Deruxtecan, Osimertinib, and Durvalumab. This is in line with reduction of customs duty and GST rates on these medications.
Source: bit.ly/4fBQ3Dd

2. Delhi High Court has granted a permanent injunction against a pharma company which had imitated the design and presentation of a drug manufactured by another pharma company. This ruling highlights the requirement for pharma companies to ensure a distinctive packaging to avoid copyright Infringement claims.
Source: bit.ly/40AprhH

3. The All India Organization of Chemists and Druggists (AIOCD) has urged the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) to restrict a partnership between a rapid delivery platform and an e-pharmacy, citing concerns over regulatory and quality compliance issues that could potentially jeopardize patient safety.
Source: bit.ly/4fDJEqS

4. The Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the state government to implement a QR code system to assess the quality of medicines in the state. This QR code will provide consumers with key information about the medicine, including production and expiry dates, unit details, batch numbers, and component specifics in order to enhance consumer awareness and transparency in medicine quality.
Source: bit.ly/3YE20Bw

5. UK government is set to launch ‘World-First’ Genomics-Led pandemic warning system. The system will utilize the technology to flag and monitor potential outbreaks of bacterial or viral diseases.
Source: bit.ly/4fBdyw6

Posted on

TOP 5 HEALTH LAWS AND POLICY UPDATES

1. Multinational Pharmaceutical Companies in India have reportedly sought relaxation of mandatory 50% cut in price of essential medicines after expiry of patent on ground that it hinders innovation.

Source: bit.ly/4bWhHIN

2. India’s food regulator, The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), has issued directions to the effect that if any food sample is found to be unsafe in the primary lab report, it would result in an order prohibiting further distribution of such food. If the food sample is confirmed to be unsafe by a referral food lab, then the food will have to be recalled.

Source: bit.ly/3Yji2SR

3. A nutritional supplement firm was fined by District Consumer Commission for making misleading claims on the label of its protein supplement regarding the nature of protein content. According to the commission, making misleading claims on label amounts to deficiency of services.

Source: bit.ly/4dcHoWs

4. India’s Jammu and Kashmir High Court has dismissed a criminal complaint instituted against a retailer of medicines for failing to reveal details of manufacturer of a spurious drug. The High Court held that since the Drug Inspector already had the details, the non-provision of requested information did not constitute an offence under The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.

Source: bit.ly/4bSxPLd

5. India’s food regulator, The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), has introduced a new license category for registration of direct sellers. Direct sellers are not permitted to sell infant milk and infant milk substitutes.

Source: bit.ly/4fdxhlZ

Posted on

TOP 5 HEALTH LAWS AND POLICY UPDATES

1. The Supreme Court has issued its decision in a matter concerning the legality of exercise of powers by the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) in levying overcharging fees against an entity that claimed not to be a “distributor” or a “dealer” as defined under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1995, since it had a dual role. The Court held that there is no mutual exclusivity between a dealer and a distributor, and dismissed the appeal.
Source: bit.ly/3xPkgP1

2. The National Medical Commission, has mandated the presence and maintenance of a Tobacco Cessation Centre at all hospitals attached to Medical Colleges across the country.
Source: bit.ly/3WdIjzk

3. To curb rise in misleading advertisements, the Central Government may soon introduce regulation to restrict the advertisement of Diabetes, Sex Hormone and Oncology medication, and may require approval and permission to make claims of efficacy for these Drugs.
Source: bit.ly/46nCjst

4. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has published Draft Drugs (Amendment) Rules, 2024 whereby it intends to amend Rule 96 requiring inclusion of details of Drug excipients on retail labels of Drugs.
Source: bit.ly/463YZO9

5. The European Commission has published and adopted the Artificial Intelligence Act, which will regulate the inclusion and integration of AI into Medical Devices and In-Vitro Devices. This Act is set to come into force on the 2nd August 2024.
Source: bit.ly/3Y5qCUV

Posted on

Frequently Asked Questions on the New Menu Labelling Requirement for Food Service Establishments in India

FAQs on Food menu labelling

The packaging and labelling of food items served in a food service establishment in India is regulated by The Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 (“Regulations”). The Regulations were amended in August 2020 to introduce the concept of menu labelling for the first time in India. Menu labelling means the process of declaring the nutritional information, calorific value per serving, information about allergens, and the logo exhibition for vegetarian or non-vegetarian, as applicable, on the menu cards/boards/booklets of restaurants and hotels. The menu labelling directives have been in force since January 01, 2022. However, the food regulator had relaxed its stringent implementation till June 30, 2022 in order to grant some additional time to the food business operators to adopt to the menu labelling mandates. In order to ensure compliance to the Regulations, the food regulator will commence verification of the declarations by sampling food items listed on the menu cards/boards/booklets of the food business operators from July 01, 2022 onwards. Since, the date is approaching, we have put together a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) with our responses in this article to facilitate the food business operators to adopt the practice of menu labelling in a self-compliant manner.

Please note that these FAQs are based on our understanding of the law, and under no circumstances should they be regarded as legal or professional advice or an endorsement of any industry practice.

Q. What is the new menu labelling requirement?

A. Owing to an amendment to The Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 in August 2020, a new sub-regulation (2.4.6.), i.e., ‘Display of information in food service establishments’ was inserted to the existing regulation 2.4 enlisting specific requirements/restrictions on the manner of labelling. This sub-regulation mandates declaration of calorie information of food items amongst other specific labelling proclamations. This sub-regulation has introduced India to the concept of menu labelling in line with the emerging global trend towards reshaping the conventional food systems.

Q. Who does the menu labelling requirement apply to?

A. The menu labelling requirement is applicable to food service establishments either having central license or outlets at 10 or more locations. However, food service premises operating for a period of less than sixty days in a calendar year (consecutively or non-consecutively) are exempt from the menu labelling mandate irrespective of whether they possess a central license or have outlets at 10 or more locations.

Q. Which restaurants are covered by the menu labelling requirement?

A. Restaurants having a turnover of more than Rs. 20 Crores per annum or outlets at 10 or more locations have to ensure compliance with the menu labelling requirement.

Q. Do caterers also have to comply with the menu labelling requirement?

A. Yes. Caterers having a turnover of more than Rs. 20 Crores per annum or outlets at 10 or more locations have to comply with the menu labelling requirement. However, event caterers operating for a period of less than sixty days in a calendar year (consecutively or non-consecutively) are exempt from the labelling requirement.

Q. Do departmental canteens at the premises of central government institutions also have to declare information on their menu?

A. Yes. Departmental canteens at the premises of central government institutions having a turnover of more than Rs. 12 Lacs per annum are mandated to comply with the menu labelling requirement.

Q. Do food service establishments involved in preparation and serving of food at airports/seaports also have to comply with the menu labelling requirement?

A. Yes. Food service establishments involved in preparation and serving of food at airports/seaports have to comply with the menu labelling requirement.

Q. Do Restaurants/Caterers/Canteens at the premises of Railway Stations also have to comply with the menu labelling requirement?

A. Yes. Restaurants/Caterers/Canteens at the premises of Railway Stations serving food items through a menu card/board/booklet and having a turnover of more than Rs. 12 Lacs per annum have to comply with the menu labelling requirement.

Q. Are the food delivery platforms also required to comply with the menu labelling requirement?

A. Yes. The menu labelling requirement is applicable to all e-commerce food business operators to the extent it is applicable to physical food establishments, i.e., e-commerce food business operators have to display the mandated declarations on their website/platform only for food items from those establishments which have a central license or outlets at 10 or more locations. The e-commerce food business operator can either get this information directly from the respective food business operators and update it on their online platforms or implement a feature on their web and/mobile applications that allows such restaurant chains to upload and exhibit the same information for every food that is offered for sale by the restaurant on the platform of the e-commerce food business operator.

Q. Is the menu labelling requirement also applicable to food items not listed on the menu of the food service establishment?

A. No. The menu labelling mandate is not applicable to special-order items or modified meals not listed on the menu of the food service establishments. The menu labelling mandate is also not applicable to self-serve condiments that are free of charge and not listed on the menu. In addition, the menu items prepared as per the request of the customer will also not attract a menu label irrespective of the mode and manner of sale.

Q. What declarations have to be mentioned against the food items on the menu card as per the menu labelling requirement?

A. The following information has to be declared against the food items displayed on the menu cards/boards/booklets of the food service establishments in a manner compliant to the provisions of the Regulations:

  • Calorific value (in kcal per serving and serving size) including the reference information on calorie requirements to be specified verbatim as “an average active adult requires 2,000 kcal energy per day, however, calorie needs may vary”
  • Information relating to allergens
  • Logo for vegetarian or non-vegetarian
  • Nutritional information
  • Information relating to organic food or ingredients, if claimed
  • Specific labelling requirements mandated under the Regulations relating to food products containing added monosodium glutamate, artificial sweeteners, caffeine, polyols, polydextrose, and plant stanol esters

Q. How can a food business operator determine the nutritive value of the food items displayed on their menu?

A. The calorie and nutrition information for food items can be determined by the food service establishments either by a laboratory testing and a nutrient analysis method or by manual calculation using the nutritive/calorific values of each of the ingredients provided by a credible scientifically-backed source. In the latter case, the food business operator will be required to retain physical or soft copy documentation/records of all such sources relied by him for determining the nutritive value of food items for the purposes of verification by the food safety officers, as and when required. On the other hand, the laboratory testing and nutrient analysis method is usually adopted by restaurant chains preparing standardized food items with standardized ingredients and recipes across their outlets.

Q. What if the nutritive value determined by a food business operator is not entirely accurate?

A. A deviation of up to twenty-five per cent is allowed by the regulator.

Q. What is the objective behind mandating the menu labelling requirement?

A. The objective behind introduction of the menu labelling mandate is to enable the consumers to make informed choices about their food purchases and promote public health.

Q. Is there any penalty for non-compliance with the menu labelling requirement?

A. Yes. Any non-compliance with the menu labelling requirement may initially attract an improvement notice from the designated officer under Section 32 of The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 directing compliance. If the food business operator fails to comply with an improvement notice, his licence may be suspended and even cancelled if the non-compliance with the improvement notice continues.

Posted on

GUIDE TO MANDATORY LABELLING REQUIREMENTS FOR COSMETICS IN INDIA

Mandatory Labelling Requirements for Cosmetics in India

Regulatory declarations usually do not receive the same importance as cosmetic product claims and design, but they are essential nonetheless and may invite liability if they are found to be missing from a product package.

The above statement may apply to cosmetics sold all around the word, but is especially true for cosmetics products sold in India because the Indian cosmetics regulator (the State Licensing Authority i.e.  SLA for domestically manufactured cosmetics, and the Central Drugs Standards Control Organization i.e. CDSCO for imported cosmetics) does not approve labels at the time of granting marketing authorization (even though it is mandatory to submit a copy of the label at the time of application). It is up to the importers and manufactures of cosmetics products to ensure that mandatory declarations laid down under the Cosmetics Rules, 2020 (“Cosmetics Rules”) and other laws appear on the product’s label.

Omitting any of the compulsory declarations would render the product ‘misbranded’ under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and may have consequences for the manufacturer or importer, ranging from suspension or cancelation of manufacturing license or import registration to criminal prosecution. It may even have consequences for the whole sellers and retailers, as misbranded products are bound to be confiscated without compensation.

In this article, we have described mandatory labelling requirements for sale of cosmetics in India.

Understanding inner label and outer label

Typically, a cosmetic product would have labels on the container (“inner label”), an outer wrapper or box (“outer label”), and sometimes a leaflet containing instructions or additional information.

The Cosmetics Rules not only prescribe the declarations but also stipulate the label on which those declarations should appear.

As per the Cosmetics Rules the following declarations must appear on the label or labels specified. If the product has only a single label, all declarations must appear on that label.

Mandatory declarations for cosmetics manufactured in India under Cosmetics Rules, 2020

Inner and Outer labels

The following information needs to appear on label on the container as well as any external packaging.

  • Name of the cosmetic
  • Name of legal manufacturer
  • Complete address of the premises where the cosmetic has been manufactured
  • Use before date/date of expiry.
  • List of ingredients, present in concentration of more than one percent, shall be listed in the descending order of weight or volume at the time they are added, followed by those in concentration of less than or equal to one percent, in any order, and preceded by the words “INGREDIENTS”

Inner or Outer labels

The following information needs to appear on either the inner or outer label.

  • Distinctive batch/lot code* [preceded by “Batch No.”, “B. No”, “Batch”, “Lot No.” or “Lot”]
  • Manufacturing License Number* [preceded by “M”, “M.L. No.”, or “Mfg. Lic. No.”]

It is advisable to include the license number and batch code on the both outer and inner label, as most regulatory authorities check the external label for compliance, but most consumers discard the secondary package upon unboxing.

Only on Outer label:

The following information only needs to appear on the outer label:

  • Net contents (weight for solids, fluid measure for liquids, and either for semi-solids)*
  • Number of items, if more than one

Only on Inner Label(s):

If there are any hazards linked to a cosmetic, the following should appear:

  • Adequate directions for use
  • Any warning, caution or special directions
  • Names and quantities of ingredients that are hazardous or poisonous

If not, only the declarations that need to appear on both the inner and outer label must be mentioned on the container.

Mandatory declarations for cosmetics imported into India under Cosmetics Rules, 2020

The Cosmetics Rules stipulate the labelling requirements for all products that are sold in the Indian market, which includes imported cosmetics. All the information that must appear on the domestically produced cosmetics must also appear on imported cosmetics (except to the extent mentioned below). In addition, details of the importer must also be mentioned, so that consumers and the regulators have access to a domestic entity in relation to the imported products. Note that the modifications to the labelling may be effected at a customs bonded warehouse i.e. before clearing Indian customs before after importing into India.

The following additional declarations must appear:

  • Import registration certificate number [preceded by “RC”, “RC No.”, “Reg. Cert. No.”]
  • Name of importer
  • Address of importer
  • If the importer does not wisht to declare the manufacturing site, –then a declaration of country of manufacture as would suffice [“Made in (Country)”].
  • If the cosmetic is imported from a country that does not require that the manufacturing license number be mentioned, manufacturing license number need not be mentioned.

Exemptions for small-size cosmetic packages under Cosmetics Rules, 2020:

Small containers of cosmetics are subject to certain relaxations.

  • Address of manufacturer may be shortened to only principal place of manufacture and the pin code where the cosmetic’s container is less than or equal to 60 ml of liquid and 30g of solids and semi-solids.
  • Batch code need not be mentioned on any cosmetic that are up to 10 grams if in the solid or semi-solid state or 25 ml if in the liquid state.
  • The declaration of net contents need not appear in case of a package of perfume, toilet water or the like, the net content of which does not exceed 60 ml or any package of solid or semi-solid cosmetic the net content of which does not exceed 30 grams
  • The list of ingredients need not appear for cosmetics that are less than or equal to 60 ml of liquid and 30g of solids and semi-solids.

These relaxations have likely been granted to ensure that the vital declarations are still present and readable, while avoiding unnecessary packaging and inserts.

Requirements for Hair Dyes containing dyes, colours and pigments under Cosmetics Rules, 2020:

Hair dyes must contain additional declarations due to their strong chemical composition, and the likelihood of reactions occurring.

The following statements must appear on both the inner and outer labels in English and in local languages:

  • “Caution.﹘ This product contains ingredients which may cause skin irritation in certain cases and so a preliminary test according to the accompanying directions should first be made. This product should not be used for dyeing the eyelashes or eyebrows; as such a use may cause blindness.”
  • “This preparation may cause serious inflammation of the skin in some cases and so a preliminary test should always be carried out to determine whether or not special sensitivity exists. To make the test, cleanse a small area of skin behind the ear or upon the inner surface of the forearm, using either soap and water or alcohol. Apply a small quantity of the hair dye as prepared for use to the area and allow it to dry. After twenty-four hours, wash the area gently with soap and water. If no irritation or inflammation is apparent, it may be assumed that no hypersensitivity to the dye exists. The test should, however, be carried out before each and every application. This preparation should on no account be used for dyeing eyebrows or eyelashes as severe inflammation of the eye or even blindness may result.”

Cosmetics that are subject to any Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS):

The Ninth Schedule to the Cosmetics Rules specifies the BIS Standards that are applicable to a total of 37 categories of cosmetics including skin powders, skin creams, hair oils, shampoos, soaps, lipsticks, foundations, etc. Further, if any new BIS standards are introduced for cosmetics, those would become mandatory after six months from the date of publication.

If any of the standards specify labelling requirements, they must mandatorily be complied with. This requirement applies to both domestically manufactured and imported cosmetics.

Animal Testing Declaration

While most products do include a statement or symbol to signify that the cosmetic product was not tested on animals, the Cosmetics Rules do not require that the declaration be made since animal testing has been outrightly banned for cosmetic products. Should the brand choose to include the declaration, however, care should be taken that they do not use any of the symbols associated with certifications such as the PETA’s ‘Beauty without Bunnies’ or the Cruelty-Free International’s ‘Leaping Bunny’ unless the certification has actually been obtained.

Mandatory declarations for cosmetics imported or manufactured into India under Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011

In addition to the Cosmetics Rules, the label must also contain the declarations required under the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 (“Packaged Commodity Rules”).

The additional declarations that would be required are:

  • Generic name of the product
  • Maximum retail price
  • Contact details for customer care
  • Date of import, if applicable

Alteration of Mandatory Declaration on Cosmetics Product Labels:

Caution should be taken while finalising the labels for a cosmetic product, since making any modifications to the label once the product leaves the manufacturing factory premise (in case of manufactured cosmetics) or the Indian customs (in case of imported cosmetics), would require prior approval from the office of Drugs Controller General of India (India), who heads the CDSCO, and, if the modification relates to a mandatory declaration under the Packaged Commodity Rules, the authority thereunder as well.

Posted on

Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs and Sanitizers – Regulatory requirements, uncertainties and important considerations for doing businesses in India

Alcohol Based Hand Rubs India Legal Requirements Issues

Summary: Due to the sudden spurt of demand for hygiene products due to COVID-19 virus pandemic,   several manufacturers and marketers in India are now selling hand sanitizers containing ethanol or isopropyl alcohol as an active ingredient.  However, regulatory uncertainties, especially surrounding requirement of drug license for stock and sale and scope of price control are becoming roadblocks for businesses from scaling-up operations. Manufacturers and marketers of hand sanitizers are thus forced to explore alternate options such as manufacturing hand sanitizers as a cosmetic or ayurvedic formulation (Indian medicine) to overcome some of these regulatory challenges. However, these alternatives have their own limitation.

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) has said that hand hygiene is extremely important to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus. As part of hand hygiene guidelines, WHO  has recommended the use of an alcohol-based hand rub for 20-30 seconds using appropriate technique when hands are not visibly dirty. In line with these guidelines, various governments around the world have promoted the use of ethyl alcohol or isopropyl alcohol-based hand rubs for hand hygiene. India is no exception.

The WHO endorsement and government recommendations for alcohol-based hand sanitizers have resulted in high public demand for these products in India. Due to the heightened public demand, there is a race to manufacture and market alcohol-based hand sanitizers (gel) and hand rubs (liquid) (together referred to as “ABHRs”). The Drug Licensing Authorities have also started granting a license to manufacture ABHRs in a record time of three (3) days to drug manufacturers, even to alcohol distilleries and cosmetic manufacturers to ensure steady and sufficient supply of hand sanitizers and hand rubs.

However, manufacturers and marketers of ABHRs are now faced with some legal and regulatory challenges, which they must overcome in order to scale the business of ABHRs. In this article, we have discussed these challenges in detail.

Stock and sale drug license

The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (DCA) mandates that every drug stocked or sold in India must be sold under a license unless the drug, or the person stocking or selling the drug, is exempt by law from this requirement.

There is no such exemption for ABHRs. Therefore, the entire supply chain, including retailers of ABHRs, are required to sell them under a stock and sale license under DCA.

However, due to COVID-19 (Corona) virus, it is not possible to meet the current demand for ABHRs through existing distribution and retail channels that have stock and sell license for drugs. Therefore, there is a widespread expectation that ABHRs should be sold through general FMCG distribution and retail channels.

The only way to legally do so is by positioning ABHRs as disinfectants. There is an exemption under DCA for disinfectants that allows disinfectants to be stocked and sold without a drug license. Such an exemption from stock and sale drug license is not unique to disinfectants. Several other drugs presently enjoy such exemptions as well, for example, oral rehydration salts, medicated dressings, condoms etc.

Some courts in India have, in the past, recognized the disinfectant properties of specific formulations of antiseptic liquids containing alcohol and validated their ability to avail exemption from drug stock and sale license otherwise available only to disinfectants. However, the courts are yet to specifically opine on exemption of ABHRs in general from the requirement of stock and sale license.

The industry is awaiting an official clarification on this issue. The central drug regulator, the Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI), is currently reviewing the regulatory positioning of hand sanitizers, including ABHRs, as ‘disinfectants’ and availability of exemption from drug stock and sale license to them. Until DCGI takes a final position, some State-level Drug Licensing Authorities may accept ABHR’s claim of disinfectants and allow them to be stocked and sold by the distributors and retailers without drug license. But Some State-level Drug Licensing Authorities some may not do the same, and the overall objective to scale ABHRs business to meet demand may not be met.

It is our view that such an exemption should be available to ABHRs, especially since the US Pharmacopeia, which is one of the pharmacopoeias recognized under Indian law for drug quality standards, explicitly acknowledges disinfectant properties of ABHRs.

Meanwhile, with a view to improve access to ABHRs, the Government has notified them as an essential commodity (discussed in next paragraph in detail). However, notification of ABHRs as an essential commodity does not automatically exempt them from the requirement to be sold under a stock and sale drug license either at distributor or retail level. All drugs sold in India are, in fact, essential commodities.

To overcome the limitation imposed by requirement of drug stock and sale license on distribution of ABHRs, some manufacturers and marketers are manufacturing ABHRs under as an ayurvedic drug that is made under an ayurvedic drug manufacturing license, or as cosmetic that is made under a cosmetic manufacturing license. Both ayurvedic drugs and cosmetics do not require any regulatory license for stock and sale and therefore may be distributed via a supply chain that does not have a drug stock and sale license.

However, there are significant challenges in selling ABHRs as ayurvedic drugs or cosmetics. For example, ayurvedic drugs containing alcohol have a long history of litigations with excise department for their potential to be abused as intoxicating liquor. Some State Governments in India have prescribed a limit on alcohol content, stating that alcohol used in the manufacture of antiseptic solutions should not contain alcohol in excess than is necessary for the preservation of (ayurvedic) ingredients. As ABHRs typically have 60%+ alcohol content, manufacturers and marketers of ABHRs must ensure that their product passes the above test.

When ABHRs are sold as cosmetics, it is not possible to make any ‘drug’ claim on it. For example, it is not possible to claim on the label that the ABHR ‘kills’ germs, as it would mean that the product is not for cosmetic application but for medicinal application. The definition of ‘drug’ under DCA is broad and covers all substances that are intended to be used in the prevention of disease in human beings. If any such ‘drug’ claim is made on the label of a cosmetic, then it may invite strict regulatory action under DCA.

Status as new drugs in India

The two ABHR formulations recommended by WHO are: Ethanol 80% (v/v) or Isopropyl alcohol 75% (v/v), Glycerol 1.45% (v/v) and Hydrogen peroxide 0.125% (v/v). As per the records released by central drug regulator, DCGI, both these formulations were first approved for sale in India in 2017. These formulations now preferred by most manufacturers and marketers due to the WHO endorsement and constitute the bulk of new ABHRs being launched in India.

Under New Drugs and Clinical Trial Rules, 2019 (NDCTR), a formulation is deemed to be a “new drug” for four years from the date of its first approval. Therefore, both WHO recommended formulations are to be currently treated as ‘new drugs’ for regulatory purposes in India until 2021.

When any drug is classified as a ‘new drug’, it has two consequences for the manufacturer of the drug. Firstly, a prior permission from the central drug regulator, DCGI, is required to be obtained in addition to a manufacturing license. Secondly, after the manufacturing license is granted, the manufacturer is supposed to undertake post marketing surveillance and submit periodic safety update reports (PSURs) to DCGI.

The manufacturers of ABHRs as per WHO recommended formula must ensure that DCGI permission is in place for their products, in addition to the manufacturing license, and must make periodic submissions of PSURs to DCGI as per the format specified under NDCTR.

Price control of hand sanitizers

ABHRs manufactured under a drug manufacturing license have always been under some or the other form of price control. The Drug (Prices Control) Order, 2013 (“DPCO”) regulates the prices and distribution of ABHRs containing ethyl alcohol 70% (v/v) since 2013. The current price ceiling on 70% ethyl alcohol solution is 0.56 Rupees per ml, which translates into 112 Rupees for 200 ml. All other ABHRs are restricted from increasing their maximum retail price by more than 10% in between twelve months.

However, as described earlier, it is possible to manufacture “hand sanitizers” as an Indian medicine (ayurvedic drug) or cosmetic as well. Ayurvedic formulations are not regulated for price by DPCO to a great extent and cosmetics are not regulated for price at all. Thus, the price cap of 112 Rupees for 200 ml will not apply to ayurvedic or cosmetic hand sanitizers. Furthermore, DPCO does not regulate cost of raw materials of drugs, in this case methylated industrial alcohol / denatured ethyl alcohol / isopropyl alcohol. The DPCO also does not empower State Governments to direct manufacturers of drugs to enhance production capacity and increase their availability. This power is vested only with the Central Government.

In order to overcome these challenges, the Indian Government has notified The Essential Commodities Order, 2020, thereby classifying “hand sanitizers” as essential commodity until June 30th, 2020. Due to this, all hand sanitizers (drug, ayuvedic medicine, cosmetic) and the raw material used in them have come under the purview of price control and have become amenable to jurisdiction of respective State Governments. The Indian Government has also notified The Fixation of Prices of Masks (2 ply and 3 ply), Melt Brown Non-Woven Fabric and Hand Sanitizers Order, 2020 (“Hand Sanitizer Price Control Order”). As a consequence, all hand sanitizers (drug, ayurvedic, cosmetic) cannot be sold for price higher than 100 Rupees for 200 ml until June 30, 2020. Needless to say, after expiry of the aforesaid order, hand sanitizers will be regulated as per DPCO (to the extent applicable to them).

There has been a collateral impact of the Hand Sanitizer Price Control Order on non-alcohol based hand sanitizers. There are currently at least twenty-four (24) formulations of hand sanitizers approved for sale in India, some of which are not alcohol-based. The Hand Sanitizer Price Control Order does not clarify whether it applies only to alcohol-based hand sanitizers or other hand sanitizers as well. The expression “hand sanitizer” is not defined under law, and has been interpreted loosely by the central drugs regulator, DCGI. The DCGI has in fact put out a list of all hand sanitizers approved by it which includes both alcohol-based and non-alcohol based hand sanitizers. Therefore, there is a risk that the Hand Sanitizer Price Control Order may be interpreted broadly and cover non-alcohol based hand sanitizers as well.

On a separate note, manufacturers who have been selling formulation of ethyl alcohol 70% (v/v) will have to obtain a prior price approval from central price regulator, National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA), before manufacturing ABHR containing ethyl alcohol as per the procedure prescribed under DPCO.

Making Corona related Claim

There is scientific laboratory data now in place to support the claim that WHO recommended formulae for ABHRs, or ethyl alcohol or isopropyl alcohol in concentration of more than 30% v/v, can inactivate COVID-19 virus in thirty (30) seconds.

However, such scientific laboratory data has not been endorsed by India’s central drug regulator, DCGI, and is very specific to WHO formulations when used under laboratory conditions. If any manufacturer or marketer wishes to put a generic COVID-19 virus related claim on its label, it may need to first obtain prior permission from DCGI who may decide to treat the ABHR as a untested ‘new drug’ and require the manufacturer to submit supporting laboratory data for its own formulation before it is permitted to make any COVID-19 virus related claim.

Needless to say, in absence of the permission from DCGI, any such claim may make the manufacturer liable for prosecution under DCA.

Making “WHO recommended formula” claim

There is an expectation in some quarters of the industry that the if an ABHR is manufactured as per the WHO recommended formulae (described in earlier paragraphs), then it should be launched with a supporting claim of ‘WHO recommended formula’ on its label. However, it may not be ethical to commercially exploit the WHO brand name since the WHO formulae were originally recommended as an alternative when suitable commercial products were either unavailable or too costly. The actual recommendation from WHO for ABHRs is, in fact, for any effective alcohol-based hand rub product that contains between 60% and 80% of alcohol.

For context, the WHO recommended formula even today is intended for local production by pharmacies and WHO has permitted use of its brand name by them in order to (most likely) lend credibility to the end product.

On the same note, it is an offence in India to put the name of World Health Organization or its abbreviation (WHO) without prior permission of the Central Government under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950. Therefore, even if a manufacturer is able to manufacture the exact formulation as recommended by WHO, it should not claim that it is manufactured “as per WHO recommended formula” without prior permission of the Central Government.

Putting Government Logo for endorsement in fight against Covid-19 virus

Like World Health Organization, putting the name or official seal or emblem of the Government of India or of any State or of a Department of any Government without prior permission of the Central Government is an offence under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.

Getting the labelling right

Apart from alcohol, there may be other active ingredients in ABHRs such as hydrogen peroxide which kill or limit the growth of harmful microorganisms. Such ABHRs with more than one active ingredients fall in the category of ‘fixed dose combinations’ (“FDCs”). Every FDC is required by law to state the composition on the label first, followed by its brand name. For instance, in case of the WHO recommended formulae described earlier, the name of the active ingredients must appear prominently on the label and simply writing “hand sanitizer” or “hand rub“ may not be enough.

Further, due to the high alcohol content in the ABHRs, there are specific declarations that ought to appear on their label. Each label must specify that ABHR contains denatured alcohol (in case of use of methylated spirit) and that it is for external use only. If the ABHR is making a disinfectant claim, then it must specify the mode of use. The content of the alcohol in the ABHR must be stated in terms of average percentage of absolute alcohol.

It is also advisable to write about storage conditions and appropriate warnings, in view of the high concentration of alcohol in ABHRs.

Same brand name, different drug

Some marketers of ABHRs are selling two or more formulations of ABHRs under the common / umbrella branding of ‘Hand Sanitizer’. This strategy should be revisited, since different formulations of ABHRs are different drugs, and selling different drugs under a common / umbrella branding of ‘Hand Sanitizer’ may be misleading.

If a marketer is selling ABHRs manufactured under pharmaceutical drug license and ayurvedic drug license under a common / umbrella branding such as ‘Hand Sanitizer’, then the regulatory risk identified above may increase since pharmaceutical drug and ayurvedic drug are two very different products though with the same end-application.

The law does not want consumers to be misled while buying drugs. Therefore, every manufacturer who wishes to sell ABHR under a brand name is required to file a declaration at the time of applying for drug manufacturing license. The declaration states that the brand name under which the drug is proposed to be sold is not used by  any other manufacturer. This declaration should be submitted by manufacturers of ABHRs before obtaining the manufacturing license for ABHR.

Getting quality aspects right

The manufacturers of ABHRs is obligated by law to ensure that its products are of standard quality. The WHO has recommended that the efficacy of any ABHR should be proven according to European (EN 1500) or American (ASTM E-1174) standards. Considering these are foreign standards and may not be enforceable in India, manufacturers of ABHRs must ensure that the hand sanitizers at least satisfy requirements of quality and efficacy as per applicable Indian standards.

As of date, in case a drug is found to be not of standard quality (NSQ), the liability lies with the manufacturer and not the marketer. However, this will change in future. From March 1, 2021, the marketers of drugs themselves will be responsible for the quality of the drug and the agreement between marketers and manufacturers will play an important role in the determination of liability. Therefore, the meeting of applicable Indian quality standards by ABHRs will be important for both the marketer and the manufacturer.

Conclusion

Hand Sanitizers, specifically ABHRs, are more relevant and in-demand in India than ever before. However, manufacturers and marketers of ABHRs should be careful about compliance with laws and regulations, because any oversight today may invite strict regulatory action in future.