Why Do Food Poisoning Cases Keep Happening in Indonesia's Free Meals Programme?

TheIndonesia.co - Suspected food poisoning incidents linked to Indonesia's Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) programme continue to emerge in several regions, raising fresh concerns over whether food safety systems at the programme's Nutrition Fulfilment Service Units (SPPGs) are functioning effectively.

Sri Raharjo, Professor at the Faculty of Agricultural Technology at Gadjah Mada University (UGM), said the recurrence of incidents involving different food providers suggested that government evaluations had yet to address the root causes of the problem.

According to Sri, the main concern is not simply the occurrence of food poisoning cases, but the lack of transparency regarding the findings of previous investigations.

Although food samples are routinely tested in laboratories, he said the results are often not communicated either to the public or to those responsible for preparing and distributing the meals. As a result, opportunities to correct mistakes and prevent similar incidents are lost.

"The findings need to be communicated back so it is clear whether contamination has been confirmed or not. As I have not received any information on whether these laboratory results are shared with the SPPGs, I assume they may not be fully communicated for corrective action to be taken," Sri told Suara.com on Thursday (23 July).

He argued that this has left evaluations without a strong evidence base. Without publicly identifying the causes of each incident, both the government and programme operators are forced to rely on assumptions rather than data.

As a consequence, similar cases are likely to recur in different locations.

"If laboratory findings are delayed or simply disappear from public discussion, it shows that preventive efforts are relatively ineffective," he said.

Sri also questioned whether SPPGs currently have adequate systems in place to prevent foodborne illnesses. If incidents continue to occur across different facilities, he said, it indicates that food safety controls are not being implemented consistently.

"One day it happens at SPPG A, another time at SPPG C, then later at SPPG Y. If the incidents simply move from one location to another, it shows that efforts to prevent food safety failures are not working properly," he added.

According to Sri, every SPPG should maintain a comprehensive food safety assurance system, documenting every stage of food handling—from the condition of ingredients upon arrival and storage temperatures to cooking processes and meal distribution.

Such records, he said, are essential for tracing where failures occur within the food production chain. However, he believes documentation practices remain weak, making it difficult to identify the exact source of contamination when incidents arise.

"Evaluations may appear to have been conducted, but without reliable data their quality becomes very limited," he said.

Sri added that even basic records, such as freezer temperatures, cooking temperatures, processing times and delivery schedules, could significantly improve investigations.

He stressed that food safety should be regarded as a fundamental measure of the MBG programme's success, alongside nutritional standards and the number of beneficiaries reached. According to him, the programme can only be considered successful if the meals provided are not only nutritious but also safe to consume.