Shortsightedness on halal food issue

The recent debates on mandatory halal food certification have so far focused on whether this could be regulated by the state or if an organization would be trusted to conduct the assessments.

Critics of the halal bill say since Indonesia has a Muslim majority, food and other products should, by default, be halal.

It's the haram products, they say, that should be certified.

Proponents of the bill, however, suggest Indonesia's large Muslim population get behind mandatory certification.

But are we only thinking of domestic consumption?

What about export?

There are more than 1.4 billion Muslims out there in need of certified halal food. With around 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide this global market is worth some US$600 billion (annually), Agriculture Minister Anton Apriyantono said Wednesday at a seminar on halal food.

Being the perennial loser that Indonesia is, a highly pessimistic scenario where we contribute a mere 1 percent to this market, we would still stand to gain US$6 billion.

Halal-certified food production should not be limited to Muslims, following the strict dietary law to take advantage of the relatively untapped market.

Being a Buddhist country does not prevent Thailand, for example, promoting halal food.

Under its 2003 budget, the Thai government provided a grant for the establishment of the then Central Laboratory and Scientific Information for Halal Food Development at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.

This center serves as the hub for Thailand's halal science network. Currently named the Halal Science Center of Chulalongkorn University, the center works in cooperation with more than 10 laboratories based in other universities and institutions across Thailand.

It is easy to find halal processed food in Thailand -- canned tuna, biscuits, you name it -- in most retail outlets, from minimarkets to hypermarkets, simply by looking for the halal sign.

Australia, a major meat exporter, has also begun focusing on exporting halal food and products.

Multinational food producers have taken advantage of halal certification, producing certified food in central locations and distributing it to other countries in the region.

Nestle for example, has chosen Malaysia as its center of excellence for producing halal food.

With such examples including non-Muslim countries making investments and then reaping rewards from the halal food market, Indonesia needs to concentrate on this lucrative business.

We should not waste time debating whether the halal label is necessary or not.

This could be a more productive endeavor but is extremely difficult due to different views held by various branches and schools of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).

Currently, there is no widely accepted standard and each country stands by its own certification. Products certified halal in one country may not necessarily be deemed halal elsewhere.

Indonesian poultry for example cannot be exported to Brunei Darussalam since authorities there demand their own certification, Anton said.

Conversely, he said, when Indonesia plans to import meat from Argentina, MUI send a team there to check the process even though the meat is certified halal by Argentinean authorities.

A unified standard would remove these hassles and ensure a free flow of halal food and products, in this era of globalization and free trade.

Critics of the bill also question the capability of MUI (which currently issues halal certification) saying it lacks resources, equipment and competence.

Others accuse MUI of taking money and kickbacks from supposedly innocent producers, by charging certification fees.

These issues could be resolved with better cooperation between agencies such as food-related academic institutions and testing agencies.

Otherwise the MUI could move from being an operator to having a more regulatory function by setting a standard such that various agencies can take responsibility for the certification instead of the MUI itself.

MUI should focus on studying various halal standards so that halal food and products from Indonesia would be accepted in most if not all other countries with Muslim communities.

The main aim is of course, again, is to set a universal halal standard.

If MUI fears loosing certification fees, it could still charge testing centers and not food producers.

There is nothing wrong with charging fees as long as all the procedural standards are met and upheld. The certifying business itself is already big business. Take, for example, the certification of various ISO standards.

By decentralizing testing centers, halal producers could get products certified cheaper and faster, thus expanding the halal market.

The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post. He can be reached at novan@thejakartapost.com.

First published on The Jakarta Post on Monday, March 3, 2008