|
The OIE, Nigeria, And The Fire (Epidemic) Next Time By Edmund Orok Edem The Office International des Epizootics (OIE) is an acronym for the World Organization for Animal Health. It is an international animal health organization that helps countries screen animal disease information and reduces the likelihood for epidemics. Epidemics are diseases which attack many people and animals within the same locality at the same time, but only occasionally present in the population. When it occurs, it is widely diffused and spreads rapidly. An important function of the OIE is to inform governmental veterinary services of the occurrence and course of epidemics that could imperil animal or human health. The OIE also promotes and coordinates research into the surveillance and control of animal diseases throughout the world. It serves as a ‘catalyst’ for attracting funds urgently needed for these activities in member countries. In addition, the OIE sets the standards for diagnostic methods and vaccine methodologies in international trade. In today’s economy, the unhindered flow of international trade in animals and animal products requires veterinary policies calculated to avoid the spread of transmissible diseases to animals and humans. The OIE sets standard procedures upon detection of contagious animal disease in any member country amongst which includes widespread culling, quarantine, animal movement control inside the country, and disinfection of the infected premises. Nigeria, which has about 130 million people, has an average life expectancy of only 41 years, according to 2003 data from the World Health Organization (WHO). It is a member of the OIE, and has benefitted from this membership. In the recent outbreak of avian influenza in some Nigerian states, the OIE called on Nigerian authorities to shut down poultry markets in the affected state and its neighbors. It also recommended the adoption of disease-surveillance measures in the other countries surrounding Nigeria i.e. Benin, Cameroon Chad, Ghana, Niger and Togo. Nigerian authorities, reportedly (?) and without being urged slaughtered 40,000 animals. Nigeria’s Minister of Agriculture announced that farmers losing animals to culling will be compensated for their loss of property, a statement welcomed by the OIE. But who was going to pay? It is well documented that fear of the economic loss of livestock can give farmers motive to hide their animals from culling operations, allowing diseases to spread. OIE emphasized again to the Nigerian authorities that the influenza virus very often spreads through the movement of affected birds and therefore it was extremely important to instantaneously stop the movement of poultry and their products from the affected areas, in order to contain the spread of the disease. The OIE also mentioned the importance of establishing compensation schemes which are necessary to encourage early disease reporting and prevent the marketing and consumption of infected poultry. Nigeria listened or at least pretended to. Why? The OIE possesses certain persuasive attributes in its arsenal which it deployed in Nigeria, since policies and decisions by the OIE can have deep penalty for international trade and aid. The OIE is the watchdog of other international bodies and acts as an impartial arbiter and a guarantor of good conduct to these financial institutions. A country cannot mount a sanitary barrier to trade without a scientific basis, which must be confirmed by the OIE. A country cannot also source for funds to improve its capacity to protect its populace against epidemics without working hand in hand with the OIE, which the situation Nigeria found itself in. The advent of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 expanded the influence and importance of the OIE. After Nigeria officially notified the WTO and emphasized that it was working very closely with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the OIE, using their - Framework for the Progressive Control of Tran boundary Animal Diseases. “OIE standards are recognized by the WTO as reference international sanitary rules”. The WB put forward a sum of $500 million to aid Nigeria’s effort. The intervention by the OIE also assessed and pinpointed the faults within Nigeria’s institutional capabilities to ward off an epidemic. It faulted the poor service delivery of the Nigerian veterinary services and cajoled or forced the Nigerian government to set into motion the strengthening of its institutions so that they could improve their surveillance and response systems. The OIE ordered the stoppage of animal movements in Nigeria, and the Nigerian parliament belatedly rolled out an animal law to that effect which was later reviewed. Nigeria is a meat importing country and obtains a large chunk of its protein supplement from neighboring Togo and Niger Republics. The possibility of sanitary barriers being erected is nil, because of the porous nature of Nigeria’s boundaries. Nigeria thus had to fall back on OIE standards or priority measures of appropriate culling in and around outbreak spots, ring vaccination around infected areas, the control of people and livestock moving to and from outbreak zones, thorough disinfection, hygiene and good farming practices in order to meet its obligations. A very constructive aspect of the OIE intervention in Nigeria was the awareness or publicity generated by its involvement in the recent avian influenza outbreak in Nigeria. The OIE sent a joint mission to Nigeria within 48 hours of being informed of the outbreak to augment the efforts of the FAO veterinary team already on the ground. This forced public awareness amongst the populace, with people becoming more aware of the threat posed by this outbreak. This single act of the OIE saved Nigeria from a calamity. The OIE further urged that people should not touch sick or infected birds but immediately alert the competent authorities of any suspect cases. The OIE also offered assistance to Nigeria by reinforcing the national disaster administration network for epidemic response. It provided personal security equipment for both veterinary workers and health specialists, offered capacity support in surveillance and case management procedures. It urged the establishment rapid response investigation teams for each State together with standard operating procedures and equipment. The dilemma the OIE will have to deal with in Nigeria is the efficiency in the handling of the issue of compensation. Nigeria’s Agriculture Minister promised compensation, this was only on paper. Compensation schemes are a sine qua non for effective cooperation by small scale farmers which make up a large population of Nigeria’s animal industry. Compensation is useful to encourage early disease reporting, which will not take place when poor backyard farmers resort to hiding their stock. If this situation is not properly resolved, the next time an epidemic rears its head, farmers would be reluctant to cooperate. With its outstanding performance in Nigeria, it is safe to conclude that - When next the fire (epidemic) occurs, call the OIE.
|