Nigeria’s food safety system is facing renewed scrutiny after the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security and the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) disputed responsibility for inspecting fresh foods sold in open markets, exposing gaps in oversight that could leave consumers vulnerable to adulterated and potentially contaminated products.
A BusinessDay investigation published on October 23, 2026, found that the two institutions have different interpretations of their responsibilities for food safety. NAFDAC says its mandate primarily covers processed and semi-processed foods, while the Agriculture Ministry reportedly acknowledged that it has no dedicated department responsible for inspecting fresh produce intended for human consumption. The disagreement raises questions about who is accountable when food moves from farms and informal processing sites into markets and household kitchens.
NAFDAC Director-General Professor Mojisola Adeyeye said that the agency’s responsibilities include pesticide regulation and farmer education, but argued that agricultural authorities must play a stronger role in monitoring primary production and fresh produce. The ministry’s reported position, meanwhile, points to an institutional gap between responsibility for agricultural production and the practical inspection of food sold to consumers.
The concerns are not limited to the latest investigation. In September, Adeyeye said NAFDAC received 225 complaints about suspected counterfeit products in August, reflecting growing public concern about food and other consumer goods. The agency also reported removing 7,210 fake, substandard and other non-compliant products from circulation during nationwide inspections between May and July 2026. Food and water accounted for 3,633 of the products removed. These figures demonstrate enforcement activities.
NAFDAC has also cautioned against treating viral social-media claims as proof that particular products are unsafe. In October, the agency disowned a widely circulated list of allegedly fake food and consumer products, saying it had not issued the list and urging Nigerians to disregard it. The agency maintains that suspected adulteration and counterfeiting require investigation and scientific verification. This distinction is important because unsubstantiated allegations can mislead consumers and damage legitimate traders, even as genuine food-safety concerns require urgent attention.
The debate comes as Nigeria’s dairy industry is separately seeking clearer product definitions, classifications and labelling requirements. At a national roundtable in Lagos in October, stakeholders called for better alignment among NAFDAC, the Standards Organisation of Nigeria and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission over how products such as milk, creamers and fat-filled milk should be identified and presented to consumers.
The Federal Ministry of Livestock Development said a transparent regulatory framework is necessary to protect consumers, support investment and ensure fair competition. NAFDAC, meanwhile, reiterated that labels must accurately describe a product’s nature, composition and characteristics.
Nigeria already has Milk and Dairy Product Regulations introduced in 2019. The current debate therefore concerns the clarity and consistent application of product definitions, classification and labelling within the existing framework, rather than an absence of dairy rules altogether.
Broader reform has also been proposed through the National Food Safety and Quality Bill, which seeks to establish a coordinated framework for food and feed safety, clarify institutional responsibilities and strengthen accountability across the supply chain.
NBF Insight
Nigeria’s food-safety challenge is not merely a question of whether regulators are doing enough inspections. It is also about whether every stage of the food chain has a clearly identified authority, adequate technical capacity, and a system for responding when risks emerge.
Fresh produce, traditionally processed foods and packaged products move through different supply chains, but consumers ultimately experience them as part of the same food system. When responsibilities are unclear, gaps can emerge in market surveillance, laboratory testing, traceability, and enforcement. The dairy debate further shows that even where regulations exist, inconsistent interpretation or application can create confusion for businesses and consumers.
The priority should be a coordinated farm-to-consumer system that clearly allocates responsibilities among federal agencies, state authorities and local governments, backed by routine risk-based inspections, accessible laboratory testing and transparent public alerts. Regulators must also distinguish verified hazards from rumours and communicate findings clearly.
For Nigeria, the measure of progress will not be how forcefully institutions defend their individual mandates, but whether consumers can trust the food they buy and whether farmers, processors and traders have clear, consistently enforced rules to follow.
