By Osordi Ayomide
After years of delays, consultations and shifting deadlines, the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) appears ready to enforce its ban on alcoholic beverages packaged below 200ml. Reports of arrests and seizures in parts of the country suggest that this time, the regulator means business. Few Nigerians would dispute the need to protect children from alcohol abuse or reduce alcohol-related harm. But as the crackdown gathers pace, another question is quietly gaining attention: in trying to solve one problem, is the government creating another for millions of ordinary Nigerians?
NAFDAC’s position is clear. The agency believes sachet alcohol has become too cheap, too accessible and too easy for minors to obtain, making it a driver of underage drinking and other social problems. That concern is difficult to dismiss. However, it is worth asking whether the problem lies with the packaging or with the misuse of alcohol itself. Alcohol does not suddenly become more dangerous because it is sold in a sachet. A person who drinks irresponsibly can abuse a 750ml bottle just as easily as several sachets. If excessive consumption is the real enemy, then changing the size of the container alone may not be enough to change behaviour.
The economic reality cannot be ignored either. Across Nigeria, many people now buy food, cooking oil and even seasoning in small quantities because that is what their income can sustain. Alcohol is no exception. For a labourer, artisan or low-income worker, a sachet is often the only affordable option. Some consumers even argue that smaller packs help them manage their spending and limit how much they drink at a time. Whether that argument is convincing or not, it reflects the difficult choices millions of Nigerians make every day in an economy where every naira counts.
Then there are the business owners. From neighbourhood kiosks to wholesalers, countless traders invested in these products long before enforcement became aggressive. Some used personal savings, while others relied on loans to stock their shops. Overnight, goods that were legally purchased now risk becoming unsellable. While no one expects commercial interests to override public health, it is fair to ask whether those caught in the transition deserve greater consideration. Effective regulation should protect lives without wiping out livelihoods that were built within the law.
Perhaps this is why many believe the solution should go beyond outright prohibition. Public education on responsible drinking, stricter enforcement against the sale of alcohol to minors, tighter licensing of liquor outlets and tougher penalties for offenders could achieve the same objective without placing the entire burden on consumers and small businesses. History has shown that lasting behavioural change is rarely achieved through enforcement alone. People are more likely to comply with regulations when they understand and accept the reasons behind them.
Ultimately, the sachet alcohol debate is no longer just about alcohol. It is about how government balances public health with economic reality. NAFDAC deserves recognition for taking decisive steps to tackle underage drinking and alcohol abuse, but the effectiveness of this policy will not be measured solely by the number of arrests made or products seized. It will be judged by whether it delivers healthier communities without pushing struggling businesses deeper into hardship or making life even more difficult for low-income Nigerians. Good regulation should protect the public, but it must also recognise the realities of the people it is designed to serve.