UP Govt Challenges Halal Certification in Supreme Court, Questions Cost Impact on Non-Believers
UP Government Challenges Halal Certification in Supreme Court: Why Should Non-Believers Pay More?
The Uttar Pradesh government has expressed concern over the growing trend of halal certification being applied to non-meat products, prompting an inquiry in the Supreme Court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the state, raised significant questions about why non-believers should bear the additional cost of products certified as halal, a label typically associated with food prepared according to Islamic law.
The matter came to the fore on Monday, when the Solicitor General made a surprising revelation that even non-food items such as cement, iron bars, wheat flour (“atta”), and gram flour (“besan”) are now being halal-certified. Mehta’s submission during a Supreme Court hearing shocked both the justices and the public, with him describing his surprise at seeing such products under the halal certification umbrella.
What is Halal certification?
Halal, an Arabic term meaning “permissible,” refers to products or actions that are allowed under Islamic law. Halal certification, particularly in the context of food, ensures that the items have been prepared according to Islamic dietary laws, ensuring that the food is clean, lawful, and free of forbidden ingredients such as pork or alcohol.
Traditionally, halal certification has been used primarily for food, particularly meat. However, as Mehta pointed out in his submission, products like wheat flour and cement are also now being labeled as halal-certified, which has raised concerns.
The UP Government’s Argument: Higher Costs for Non-Believers
During the Supreme Court hearing, Solicitor General Mehta asked, “How can besan (gram flour) or atta (wheat flour) be halal or non-halal?” He expressed concern that halal certification has expanded to many non-food items, which he believes leads to higher costs for consumers. “I was shocked, as I am sure your lordships would be shocked, that even cement and iron bars used in construction are being halal certified,” Mehta said.
The UP government is particularly concerned about non-believers, or people who do not follow Islamic dietary practices, being forced to pay higher prices for these certified products. Mehta emphasized that halal-certifying agencies charge fees for the certification process, and this added cost might be passed on to consumers. He questioned why individuals who don’t consume halal products should have to shoulder these extra costs, merely because the certification is applied to goods they purchase.
The Case Before the Supreme Court
This issue has come to the attention of the Supreme Court during the ongoing legal battle over a controversial November 2023 notification by the Uttar Pradesh government. The notification prohibited the production, storage, sale, and distribution of halal-certified edible items within the state, except for those intended for export. This move raised alarms among halal-certifying agencies, religious organizations, and businesses involved in the halal certification industry.
The notification was issued under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which governs the regulation of food items in India. The state argued that products should not be required to carry a religious certification unless they are sold explicitly to cater to religious dietary requirements, particularly for export markets.
The Petitioners’ Response: Voluntary Lifestyle Choice
The petitioners, who oppose the Uttar Pradesh government’s notification, argue that halal certification is a personal and voluntary lifestyle choice. They emphasized that no one is forced to purchase halal-certified products. The counsel for the petitioners asserted that halal certification is a matter of personal preference and does not impose unnecessary burdens on non-believers. According to them, the halal certification process is a voluntary one that caters to the needs of consumers who follow Islamic dietary laws.
What’s Next for the Case?
The Supreme Court has granted the petitioners four weeks to file their rejoinder in response to the UP government’s concerns. The matter will be heard again in March 2024. This delay ensures that both sides have ample time to present their arguments, and the Court can weigh the implications of halal certification on both religious practices and consumer rights.
As the case progresses, it is expected to bring clarity on the broader issue of religious certifications in the food and goods industries, as well as their economic impact on consumers from different religious backgrounds.
Halal Certification: A Growing Trend
Halal certification has seen a significant rise in recent years, not only in food products but also in a variety of consumer goods. The global halal market has expanded well beyond traditional food items, with products like cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and even construction materials seeking halal certification to cater to the growing Muslim consumer base.
In India, halal-certified products are widely available, especially in areas with large Muslim populations. However, the ongoing legal discussions in Uttar Pradesh reflect the complexities that arise when religious certification intersects with commercial interests and broader consumer concerns.
Conclusion
The debate over halal certification in Uttar Pradesh highlights the tension between religious freedoms, consumer rights, and economic considerations. As the legal case continues in the Supreme Court, it will be important to address the concerns raised by both the state government and the petitioners, especially regarding the potential economic burden placed on non-believers. With the growing trend of halal certification beyond food products, this case could set a significant precedent for how religious certifications are handled in the marketplace.