The Proposed Shake-Up
In May 2026, the FSSAI released draft amendments to the Food Safety and Standards (Food Safety Auditing) Regulations, 2018. The core of the proposal is a move to standardize and, in some ways, tighten the eligibility criteria for professionals who audit
food businesses. This system of third-party audits was designed to strengthen surveillance and reduce the burden on government inspectors by having private agencies check for compliance. Satisfactory audits can lead to less frequent regulatory inspections, encouraging businesses to maintain high standards themselves. The new rules propose specific educational and professional benchmarks that every auditor must meet.
Stricter Standards on Paper
The draft rules introduce several key changes. First, they mandate that all food safety auditors must successfully complete an accredited Lead Auditor course in Food Safety Management System (ISO 22000), a globally recognized standard. This replaces a previous, less specific clause. Second, the proposal outlines an exhaustive list of 39 approved academic fields, including food science, microbiology, public health, and agricultural sciences, from which an auditor must hold a degree. Finally, it sets a practical experience threshold: a minimum of two years of work in the food sector, along with proof of having completed at least ten audits. The FSSAI opened these draft amendments for public consultation for sixty days, inviting feedback from stakeholders.
Why The Change and Who Disagrees?
FSSAI's stated goal is to bring Indian auditing practices in line with international standards, ensuring auditors have uniform, high-level knowledge of hazard analysis and safety management. The move aims to create a robust ecosystem of qualified professionals who can independently verify that food businesses are following the law. However, the headline's question—"Who is qualified?"—gets to the heart of the debate. While standardizing qualifications seems positive, some experts worry about the implementation. The system of third-party audits itself has been a subject of discussion since its inception. It relies on private agencies to reduce the regulatory load on government bodies, a strategy FSSAI describes as 'Maximum Governance, Minimum Government'. The effectiveness of this model hinges entirely on the competence and integrity of the auditors and their agencies.
A Legacy of Scrutiny
The context for this move is FSSAI's own history of being under the microscope. A critical 2017 report from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) highlighted significant issues, including ill-equipped and non-accredited state food testing labs, a shortage of qualified manpower, and lapses in the licensing process. At the time, the FSSAI countered that it was a new and evolving organization facing resource constraints, and has since invested significantly in upgrading labs and systems. This new push to define auditor qualifications can be seen as another step towards strengthening the national food safety framework and addressing past criticisms by ensuring the front-line assessors are demonstrably competent.
What Does This Mean for Consumers?
For the average consumer, the implications are significant, if indirect. On one hand, more rigorously qualified auditors should translate to safer food. By enforcing global standards like ISO 22000 and demanding specific academic and practical experience, FSSAI aims to ensure that the people checking up on food businesses—especially high-risk categories like dairy, meat, and prepared foods—know exactly what to look for. On the other hand, the debate is about whether these qualifications are the best or only measure of competence. The shift places immense trust in a system of private auditing. If the system works, it fosters a culture of self-compliance and strengthens safety. If it falters, it could create gaps in oversight. The challenge lies not just in setting the rules, but in diligently monitoring the auditors themselves.
