In apparent bid to perform its statutory function of sanitising the drug markets, the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control, NAFDAC, shut major pharmaceutical and cosmetics markets in Idumota, Lagos; Ariaria, Aba; and Ogbogwu drug market, Onitsha, back on February 10, 2025.

According to NAFDAC’s head of Enugu Zonal Operations, Martin Iluyomade, the closures were meant to prevent clashes between officials and the traders. During the closure, NAFDAC claimed it was able to isolate and destroy “alarming quantities” of expired, counterfeit and unregistered drugs, some bearing expiry dating back to 2007.

NAFDAC’s fight against fake drugs, foods and cosmetics peaked during the tenure of the late Professor Dora Akunyili, who narrowly escaped assassination in her home town, Agulu in Anambra State in December 2003. Akunyili, who pursued the case to the Supreme Court, however died in 2014. All six accused persons docked for attempted murder were set free at the Supreme Court in 2016.

This underscores the risks that enforcement of safety in the food and drug sector entails.

What made the latest effort by NAFDAC led by Professor Mojisola Adeyeye different was the manner in which the agency’s officials went about their assignment. After the market closures, the Governor of Abia State, Dr Alex Otti and his Anambra State counterpart, Professor Chukwuma Soludo, were actively involved in ensuring a conducive atmosphere to enable NAFDAC officials carry out their operations for early re-opening.

Problem, however, arose when NAFDAC announced charges that the traders must pay for their shops to be processed for reopening. The Ogbogwu traders who felt corruptly extorted, petitioned social crusader, Martin Otse (alias Very Dark Man, VDM), whose social media crusades contributed to the reopening of the market after initial face-off with NAFDAC.

Otse claimed that NAFDAC was “extorting” N700,000 from each shop owner as a precondition for the reopening of their shops. NAFDAC countered him, disclosing that “administrative charges” of N5m for sale of unregistered products (later reduced to N200,000), and N2m for violating good storage and distribution practices (later reduced to N500,000) were being enforced. NAFDAC insisted that these were “Federal Government gazetted charges”.

What baffled the public, including the many social advocacy groups that waded into the matter, was why NAFDAC would charge money and allow supposed lawbreakers who endangered the lives of the consumers of their products to go free? Should these “offenders” not have been prosecuted to allow the courts determine their culpability and impose any due penalties?

We urge NAFDAC to recognise the role these marketers play in our health sector. They should do everything possible to assist the law-abiding ones to grow, while remaining uncompromising in dealing with the criminal elements and destroying fake products.

NAFDAC officials must remain above board in their operations to avoid accusation of corruption.