The recent move by the Federal Competition & Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to ensure the food and beverages giant, Coca-Cola, produces drinks that meet approved specifications and notifies the public accordingly has been applauded by Nigerians who reacted to FCCPC’s posts on its official X (formerly Twitter) handle.
The FCCPC is currently engaged in a battle of wits with Coca-Cola over the soft drinks’ producer’s inability to notify the consuming public of the change in the formulation of its products in a manner that will not mislead consumers.
FCCPC is the leading authority for competition and consumer protection in Nigeria. It is empowered by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 (FCCPA) to, among other things, promote fair business practices and safeguard the interests of consumers. The commission employs tools such as anticompetitive practices, mergers and acquisitions, surveillance and investigation, complaint resolution, quality assurance and development, consumer and business education, among others.
The Commission, in its recent report dated July 29, 2024, released by 9:14pm on X on August 8, 2024 detailed the grounds for which the beverages giant was investigated, with the surveillance and investigation commencing from June 2019 up till August 2024 when the report was eventually released.
FCCPC said Coca-Cola Nigeria, in spite of obtaining the requisite approvals from NAFDAC for product changes, continued to produce and market the old formulation while simultaneously producing and marketing the new formulation without notifying the consuming public that new variants were being put out in the market in the same and similar packaging.
“The Commission, through a routine market surveillance in June 2019, became aware that Coca-Cola Nigeria Limited (Coca-Cola Nigeria/ CCNL) and the Nigerian Bottling Company (NBC) had introduced Coke Original Taste- Less Sugar (Coke Less Sugar) to the market as a new variant of its Coca-Cola (Coke) drink. This new variant was not announced to consumers and is bottled in a packaging that is identical to the packaging of the Coke Original,” FCCPC stated.
“The only distinguishing factor on the packaging and label design is the inclusion of the phrase ‘Less Sugar’ in an inconspicuous manner after the words ‘Original Taste’. Further, the nutritional information shows that both products have different ingredients and nutritional value.
“Following a complaint from a consumer in September 2019, the Commission carried out a market survey and discovered that the Limca lemon-lime flavoured drink appeared to have two variants which are not distinguished. These products taste different, have different ingredients and nutritional value but were packaged in identical bottles, with identical brand design and the same National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) registration numbers,” it said.
The FCCPC cited sections of its Act that were violated by Coca-Cola to include Section 116(2) which states thus, “An undertaking shall not knowingly apply to any goods a trade description that is likely to mislead consumers as to any matter implied or expressed in that trade description or alter, deface, cover, remove or obscure a trade description or trademark applied to any goods in a manner calculated to mislead consumers.”
The sections also include 131(1)(a) that states: “Every consumer has a right to receive goods that – (a) are reasonably suitable for the purpose for which they are generally intended.”
FCCPC said that according to its findings, the last production date for the old LIMCA in Maiduguri, Borno State was 18th October 2018 while the new LIMCA was first produced on 24th December 2018. At its Ikeja plant, the last production date for the old LIMCA was 5th July 2018 while the new variant was produced on 9th August 2018. In Benin City, the old LIMCA was produced last on 18th September 2018 while the new variant was first produced on 12th October 2019.
The same pattern of infringements was found in the old versus new Fanta, and old versus new Sprite.
FCCPC said Coca-Cola did not invest enough resources in the sensitization that will help customers distinguish between the new and old variants, which amounted to a violation.
Reacting to this development, a Nigerian who goes by the handle Monchie said, “It’s very interesting that @fccpcnigeria has really become serious with the lives and concerns of Nigerians. I remember complaining once about a gsm company and nothing was done. Well, that’s now in the past. Please keep up the good work, and create people-confidence in the agency.”
Chris Daramola said, “I discovered this a long time ago, but I thought it was fake. I had to leave the drink in my car for days, unsure of what to do, before my friend eventually threw it out. Coca-Cola should be held accountable. We can’t continue to accept substandard products in Nigeria.”
Another Nigerian, Obinomics, said, “I can assure you, if @fccpcnigeria and @NafdacAgency, should intensify your findings and subject most of these and other products made in Nigeria to further lab tests, you’ll see that most of these multinationals are literally feeding us with poisons.”
Muhammad Aminu Aliyu said, “I love the new @fccpcnigeria, I’m seeing and I hope you’ll follow through with this information. Thanks for showing @NafdacAgency how to revive their lost self.”
Antitrust and anti-competitive behaviours on the part of firms are a serious concern the world over, attracting heavy fines in different countries. In 2024 alone, the European Union fined Apple 1.84 billion euros for antitrust crime. The EU also fined Mondelex 337.5 million euros for the same offence. Keltbray was fined 20 million pounds sterling. In Switzerland, the Swiss Federal Competition Commission fined Swisscom $19.7 million just as the Russian FAS fined Apple $13.7 million. And recently, Nigeria’s FCCPC fined WhatsApp $220 million for breaching data privacy.
