Codex is a joint United Nations body created in 1963 by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the FAO to develop food standards, guidelines and codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.  Codex has a dual mandate: to protect consumers’ health and ensure fair practices in the food trade. 

IBFAN has been attending Codex meetings since 1995 when the World Trade Organisation (WTO) was established and was mandated  to refer to Codex Standards in trade disputes. Largely because of IBFAN’s advocacy, the standards on foods for infants and young children adopted after 1995,  all refer in some way to the International Code, the Global Strategy and/or the subsequent WHA Resolutions on infant and young child feeding. The Codex Code of Ethics for International Trade also requires Member States to “…make sure that the international code of marketing of breast milk substitutes and relevant resolutions of the World Health Assembly (WHA) setting forth principles for the protection and promotion of breastfeeding be observed.”

However, the lack of transparency and poor conflict of interest safeguards,  coupled with the dominance of food corporations and powerful exporting nations, has allowed the adoption of standards that are not fit for purpose. These standards have been regularly used in attempts to stop governments bringing in strong marketing controls. with interventions made at the WTO concerning commercial milk formula marketing, labelling or safety testing regulations of another member state, wrongly treating Codex standards as a ‘regulatory ceiling’ for trade purposes.  In fact,  governments have the sovereign right to adopt any legislation they consider necessary to protect child health as long as it does not violate international trade principles,

The 44th Codex Nutrition Committee in October 2024 (CCNFSDU44) tested a new draft prioritising system where Codex members and observers were asked to assess and score the impact new standards might have, not only on trade,  but on global public health and food safety, something we have been calling for that could help ensure that standards are in line with WHO recommendations.  This did seem to be prompt governments to recognise the role Codex has had, and still has, in flooding the world with plastic packaged UPF and be more alert to the risks of approving new global standards and guidelines.

IBFAN/ENCA comment on DRAFT STRATEGIC GOALS AND OUTCOME STATEMENTS FOR THE CODEX STRATEGIC PLAN 2026-2031, AS PROPOSED BY CCEXEC

Codex Request for comments on circular letter “2024/52-NFSDU:

(Interesting lead on greenwashing)

Here are some excerpts:

…The brief also describes parallel lobbying of the US government, the leader in some of these interventions, where the positions weigh the relative importance of the Codex Alimentarius versus World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations as international standards in World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee processes. 

1. In response to questioning by New Zealand and the United States, Thailand notified the WTO in 2015 of its intention to adopt legal provisions for “Controlling the Marketing Promotion on Food for Infant and Young Children” in alignment with the WHO International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes.

2. The United States and other countries interjected repeatedly at meetings of the World Trade Organization TBT Committee in 2016-2017 that Thailand’s proposed legislation deviated from Codex standards and that the WHO Code is not recognized as an international standard.