You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

May 21, 2012

Pharmaceutical Product Recall: New FDA Requirements

Informed Counsel

Medicine is an integral part of our lives, helping us to recover from illness and allowing us to live a longer and healthier life. However, the great benefits derived from medicine are also accompanied by a great many risks, which may be derived from the properties of the drug substance, the quality of the medicine, or in some cases, the defectiveness of the drug product itself.

A product recall is required when safety issues arise, and the defective products are required to be returned to the manufacturer or distributor. Drug recalls can be extremely costly and can damage consumer confidence in the product or company, so naturally all companies try their utmost to avoid such a scenario.

Recalls can be initiated either voluntarily or at the request of the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A recall usually results from some combination of a discovery by the manufacturer, customer complaints, or FDA observation.

Discoveries by the Manufacturer

A recall that is initiated by a manufacturer may be based on corporate conscience (or corporate social responsibility), in order to ensure compliance with the essential elements of the law, ethical standards, and business norms. Such recalls may also be designed to limit liability for corporate negligence, which can result in huge amounts of legal penalties, and can also represent an attempt to minimize damage to corporate image.

Recalls are costly to a company, because they often entail replacing the recalled product or paying for damage caused by use of the product, although this is possibly less costly than the costs that might otherwise be caused by damage to the brand name and diminished trust in the manufacturer.

Last year, a multinational company discovered, through its own routine testing program, a microbial contamination in its mouthwash product. Because the microorganism could cause adverse effects in people with weakened immune systems, the company voluntarily removed its product from all market shelves in Thailand.

Customer Complaints

People generally do not ask sufficient questions when they lack knowledge about a subject, including medication. Some people think that new medicines are more effective or safer, but this may not necessarily be true.

As a safeguard measure, the Thai FDA has implemented a Safety Monitoring Program (SMP), in which healthcare providers are requested to collect, evaluate, and study drug safety information in a proactive manner. This process relies on consumers or medical practitioners first identifying an abnormality and reporting it to the FDA and the company, which will in turn evaluate the complaint. This post-marketing surveillance system is gaining increasing importance, as it facilitates the Thai FDA’s handling of drug safety information, and enables them to take any necessary measures promptly.

FDA Observation

Drug product recalls can also be necessitated as a result of an observation made by the FDA during an inspection. Samples of marketed products are regularly tested in the analysis laboratory at the Ministry of Public Health. Significant compliance deficiencies that are noted by the FDA can result in a company having to recall some, or all, of its drug lots. For example, the Thai FDA recently found the adulteration of methyl alcohol—a toxic impurity—in traditional medicine, which led to two batches of these drug products being recalled and an announcement of the violation and the manufacturer’s name by the FDA.

The Thai FDA has also demanded the product recall of cold remedies containing pseudoephedrine (PSE), which has been used as a precursor of methamphetamine, referred to locally as yaa baa.

On April 3, 2012, the Ministry of Public Health distributed a Notification stating that remedies containing PSE are type 2 psychotropic substances, and thus people cannot possess more than 5 grams of PSE.

To avoid being penalized, pharmacies that sell medicines containing PSE have been given 30 days to return the drug products to the manufacturers or distributors. Violations will incur a fine of between THB 100,000 and THB 400,000 (approximately USD 3,415 to USD 13,650), and a jail term of between 5 and 20 years.

New Requirements of the Thai FDA

Last year, a Ministerial Notification from the Ministry of Public Health announced a new Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), which emphasizes that manufacturers must have in place a prompt and effective system to facilitate drug product recalls.

The importer or distributor should have a person who is responsible for assessing risks and coordinating product recalls with the FDA.

If there are grounds to justify the health assessment risks, the company must submit the recall submission document, which contains all the details required to enable the FDA to evaluate the product failure, assess how the failure will affect consumer safety, and formulate an adequate course of action.

This plan must include the product details, a description of the problem, distribution information, a health-hazard assessment, and the proposed recall strategy. Maintaining detailed and accurate records is absolutely critical, and indeed this can be the most important aspect in conducting the product recall.

The Thai FDA has outlined the form that the importer or distributor must fill out and submit to the FDA on completion. In addition, the Thai FDA announced on February 16, 2012, that all applicants must submit the “Recall Commitment” document, together with the drug product registration documents. Failure to comply will result in the rejection of the registration dossier, as it will be deemed to be incomplete.

In summary, recent amendments in the Ministerial Notifications have helped to advance voluntary product recalls by business operators, so that such actions are more compulsory. This, in turn, will provide supplementary assistance to government agencies and enable them to pinpoint issues and identify potentially harmful drug products more promptly and effectively, thus offering consumers a greater degree of protection.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 13, 2026
Indonesia’s Halal Product Assurance Agency (BPJPH) has issued new regulations establishing clearer procedures for imposing administrative sanctions on businesses that violate halal product assurance requirements. BPJPH Regulation No. 2 of 2026 on the Imposition of Administrative Sanctions for Violations of Halal Product Assurance Implementation, issued on June 5, 2026, strengthens Indonesia’s halal compliance framework, as mandated under Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Assurance and Government Regulation No. 42 of 2024 on the Implementation of Halal Product Assurance. BPJPH Regulation No. 2/2026 also supports the upcoming mandatory halal compliance deadline of October 17, 2026, which will apply to a broad range of products and services, including imported food and beverages, slaughtering products and services, natural and quasi-drugs, health supplements, cosmetics, chemical and genetically engineered products, clothing and accessories, household goods, prayer equipment, stationery, and class A medical devices. Scope BPJPH is authorized to impose administrative sanctions for violations of halal product assurance requirements committed by businesses, halal inspection agencies (LPH), halal auditors, halal product process companion institutions (lembaga pendamping PPH), and halal product process companions (pendamping PPH). The head of BPJPH has authority to determine, cancel, or amend the imposition of administrative sanctions, including upon receipt of objections. This authority covers revocation of Halal Certificates (including foreign halal certificate registration numbers), withdrawal of goods from circulation, freezing of LPH operations, freezing of halal product process companion institutions, revocation of PPH companion institution registration numbers, revocation of halal auditor registration numbers, and revocation of LPH accreditation status. Administrative Sanctions Businesses may be subject to any of the following administrative sanctions: Written warning; Administrative fine; Revocation of the halal certificate, including revocation of foreign halal certificate registration numbers; and Withdrawal of goods from circulation. The regulation sets out the types of violations that may trigger these sanctions, with each
July 1, 2026
Obtaining marketing authorization is a fundamental requirement for bringing pharmaceutical products to the Thai market. Companies must navigate the Thai Food and Drug Administration’s registration procedures while also complying with post-approval pharmacovigilance obligations, licensing requirements for manufacturing and importation, data protection rules, and other regulatory requirements. This guide provides an overview of Thailand’s regulatory framework for pharmaceutical marketing authorization, including available registration pathways, review timelines, application fees, postmarketing surveillance obligations, licensing requirements, exemptions, data exclusivity, freedom of information, and parallel import considerations. It is intended as a practical reference for pharmaceutical companies, regulatory affairs professionals, and others involved in bringing medicinal products to the Thai market. Download the guide below for a concise overview of the current requirements and procedures governing pharmaceutical marketing authorization in Thailand.
June 24, 2026
Patent enablement requirements are provided under Article 102 of Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law). In particular, a patent specification must “fully and clearly disclose the nature of the invention to such an extent that, based on the specification, a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art can implement the invention.” In pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents, this requirement is more complicated and subject to more rigorous assessment. The Patent Examination Guidelines (Guidelines) of the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office) were amended in March 2026 to introduce Annexes III and IV for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors, in which Annex III provides detailed guidelines on the assessment of specification requirements. These amendments were made under a project for strengthening capacity in industrial property examination between the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the IP Office. Annex III provides detailed instructions on how examiners assess enablement in a pharmaceutical or biotechnology application, and offers examples of acceptable and unacceptable descriptions with regard to the enablement aspect. Enablement Requirements in Pharma and Biotech Patents Article 12.7 of Circular 10/2026/TT-BKHCN (Circular 10) adds to the requirements of Article 102 of the IP Law that the description must demonstrate the novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability of the technical solution. For pharmaceutical composition subject matters, Article 12.9 of Circular 10 sets out that the description must present the results of clinical trials and/or the pharmacological effects of the claimed pharmaceutical composition, and must include at least the following information: Substance/mixture used. Testing method (system) employed. Information on the test results. Correlation between the pharmacological effects obtained from the tests and the application of the pharmaceutical product in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. The Guidelines note that pharmacological study results should be presented in a quantified manner, and pharmacological
June 19, 2026
For the first time, Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published a consolidated list identifying all substances that have successfully passed its novel food safety evaluation process. The list is a step forward in regulatory transparency, but it also highlights a feature of the Thai regime that food companies often overlook: each approval is tied exclusively to the company that applied for it. A substance’s appearance on the list does not give other companies the green light to use it. This article examines the structure of Thailand’s novel food approval framework, the implications of applicant exclusivity, and the strategic choices it requires of food companies looking to bring novel ingredients to the Thai market. Thai FDA Food Safety Evaluation Framework Notification No. 376 of the Ministry of Public Health requires novel food substances to undergo a food safety assessment, with an exemption only for novel foods manufactured exclusively for export. The framework also encompasses “foods that do not qualify as novel foods” but which present characteristics warranting a safety evaluation, such as differing quality standards, increased serving sizes, or applications in specific food categories, where such changes affect consumption levels, nutritional value, or consumer safety. The recently published list of foods that passed the safety evaluation by the Thai FDA is structured by substance category and identifies the approved company (domestic manufacturer or importer), country of origin, substance name and trade name, approved purpose of use, and date of the Thai FDA’s approval notification certificate. A notable feature of Thailand’s novel food regime is that the approval result is tied exclusively to the company that submitted the application. Publication of the consolidated list does not constitute a general authorization to use the approved substances. The Thai FDA’s approval certificate specifies the approved conditions of use and the requirements