41. The discussion paper was prepared by New Zealand, with assistance from Australia, Canada and the United States, at the request of the Committee at its 5th Session.[15] The delegation of New Zealand introduced the discussion paper, and specific examples of equivalence determinations were presented by Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States.
42. The discussion paper described the basis for the judgment of equivalence of sanitary measures associated with different food inspection and certification systems in regard to the relevant principles of the SPS Agreement and the Codex Principles for Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification.[16] The Committee noted that the SPS Agreement obliged countries to accept the sanitary and phytosanitary measures of other Members as equivalent, even if these measures differed from their own, if the exporting country objectively demonstrates to the importing country that its measures achieve the importing country’s appropriate level of protection. The Codex Principles also recognized that different inspection/certification systems may be capable of meeting the same objectives and are therefore equivalent, and that the obligation to demonstrate equivalence rests with the exporting country.
43. The discussion paper promoted the elaboration of guidelines for the systematic application of equivalence and incorporated a risk-based approach for sanitary (i.e. health related) measures only. The paper included definitions related to equivalence previously established by Codex and the WTO and indicated the prerequisite considerations and principles necessary in judging equivalence.
44. The application of risk analysis, the categorization of sanitary measures, the appropriate level of protection, the consideration of food safety objectives and the steps required in the judgment of equivalence were also highlighted.
45. The representative of FAO emphasized the assistance provided by that Organization to developed and developing countries alike in food control. He also noted that the judgment of equivalence should include many other factors not directly related to sanitary measures. The representative noted that the proposed guidelines should cover health-related SPS measures as well as other measures which were clearly under the Codex mandate of consumer protection and the facilitation f international trade and which were subject to the TBT Agreement. This statement was supported by several delegations.
46. Several delegations supported the development of guidelines, especially in view of the importance of elaborating a systems based approach to address WTO and Codex elements related to equivalence, and in consideration of the Committee’s broad mandate related to inspection and certification. It was noted that the equivalence procedures lessened the burden of costly and resource intensive traditional inspection methods, facilitated international trade, and provided a scientifically based risk approach for consumer protection. It was suggested that the other important non health related elements related to equivalence could be addressed more effectively in a separate set of guidelines, or in a more generic document related to both health and quality.
47. Other delegations noted that the elaboration of guidelines for the determination of equivalence did not relate to the mandate of the Committee and that in any case, the Committee should restrict its work to the equivalency of food control systems without dealing with matters such as food safety per se, which could be more effectively addressed by other Codex committees specifically concerned with food safety measures, such as the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene. It was also suggested that the judgment of equivalence should be incorporated into or annexed to the Committee’s guidelines regarding the development of equivalence agreements. Brazil and other delegations stated that inspection and certification should best be left to individual governments, especially in consideration of the difficulty in the application of overly subjective equivalence measures or ill defined food safety objectives which could result in serious financial and resource burdens and the potential creation of barriers to international trade.
48. The WTO representative emphasized that the SPS Agreement obliged Members to accept sanitary or phytosanitary measures as equivalent, and that Members shall enter into consultations with the aim of achieving bilateral and multilateral agreements of recognition of the equivalence of specified sanitary or phytosanitary measures. He noted the resource and financial burdens of developing countries in this regard, but emphasized that the negotiating history of the SPS Agreement, examples of trade practices between developing countries and industrialized countries and WTO technical assistance missions indicated that establishing equivalence of SPS measures was a long term cost saving exercise and was already or would eventually provide a multitude of benefits to these countries.
49. The Committee noted that the TBT Agreement as well as the Codex Principles for Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification stated that countries shall give positive consideration to accepting as equivalent the technical regulations of other countries, even if these regulations differ from their own. It was noted that if countries used Codex standards they could easily achieve equivalence. It was also noted that although the Committee’s terms of reference did not mention equivalency per se, the consideration of the subject appeared to be encompassed by the Committee’s mandate related to the consideration of all matters related to the inspection and certification of foods, and to the Commission’s mandate in the protection of consumers and the facilitation of international trade in foodstuffs.
50. Several delegations noted that as new concepts had been introduced in regard to the present document, it would be desirable if the delegations were given an opportunity to examine the document in their own countries, in all its aspects, including the availability of technical resources, especially in developing countries.
51. The Committee agreed with the basic principle that Codex standards should be applied in international trade, as stipulated in the SPS and TBT Agreements. The importance of establishing equivalent means of meeting food safety objectives based on Codex texts was also emphasized. The Committee reaffirmed that its work should be confined to the consideration of the equivalency of food control systems and not to the equivalency of specific requirements or standards.
52. The Committee thanked New Zealand and the other author countries for their excellent efforts. Noting the division of opinion on whether or not to proceed with the elaboration of Codex guidance in this area, the Committee agreed to the following:
