Brazil's report on actions to enhance
transparency
Communication from Brazil
The
following communication, received on 9 July 2024, is the statement made by Brazil under Item 6.c. at the 26-28
June 2024 WTO SPS Committee, and is being circulated at the request of the
Delegation of Brazil.
_______________
1. Brazil would like to draw the attention of the Committee to the
principle of transparency and its implementation by Members. As each Member
recognizes, transparency in the adoption or change of sanitary measures is of
paramount importance to achieve the establishment of a multilateral framework
of rules and disciplines to guide the development, adoption, and enforcement of
sanitary and phytosanitary measures in order to minimize their negative effects
on trade, as stated in the introductory section of the SPS Agreement.
2. The recent outbreak of avian influenza is a major concern for each Member
of this organization, and as such, it has triggered several sanitary measures
and corresponding notifications. In 2024 alone, there were more than 50
notifications in this regard. However, this situation revealed some divergences
in the application of the SPS Agreement and Decision _G/SPS/7/Rev.5.
Some Members made notifications of restrictions due to concerns about avian
influenza, but did no notifications when these restrictions were lifted.
3. In addition to the lack of transparency, the absence of a new
notification informing the removal of the measure can be detrimental to
exporting Members. It makes exports less predictable, as exporters are not sure
whether or not the measure has been lifted, and it may give the impression that
the importing Member is still uncertain about the safety of the exporting
Members' products. Several countries use notifications as an input into their
risk analysis and decision-making processes. Therefore, the absence of a
notification may have a negative impact on the exporting Member without any
sanitary justification.
4. It should be recalled that the SPS Agreement, the Decision of the
Committee on Transparency, and the practice of the Committee are clear that any
change in sanitary measures should be notified.
5. Article 7 establishes the following: "Members shall notify
changes in their sanitary or phytosanitary measures and shall provide
information on their sanitary or phytosanitary measures in accordance with the
provisions of Annex B." In this sense, when a measure is lifted, there is
a change. Therefore, the notification is mandatory and not discretionary.
6. This excerpt alone is enough to make the case for notifications when
suspensions are lifted. Nevertheless, the Committee's decisions have addressed
this issue to make them more practical and less controversial. Paragraph 2.32
states that: "Members should notify changes in the status of a notified
SPS regulation. The issuance of an addendum allows Members to track the status
of a SPS regulation via its unique notification number." Brazil emphasizes
the idea of tracking the status of a SPS regulation, one of the most important
innovations that the SPS Agreement has brought to international trade. The same
paragraph emphasizes that even the extension of sanitary measures in place
should be informed.
7. Even in cases that the measure initially notified has a defined
course of action, such as setting an end date for the ban, this should be
notified to the Committee either in the case of an extension or in the case of
the actual application of the end date. The text of decision _G/SPS/7/Rev.5
also suggests that trade facilitation measures do not give a new deadline for
comments and cites the lifting of an import ban as an example, as can be seen
in paragraph 2.8 of the said decision. As a result of this understanding,
it can be seen in the templates provided on Annex B-2 of the decision checkbox
for withdrawal of regulations.
8. Another proof of the understanding of the notification of the
lifting of bans is that several Members diligently notify this Committee of
every lifting of a ban. Only in 2024, there were more than 13 of such
notifications from Members such as the Kingdom Saudi Arabia, Japan, the Philippines,
the State of Kuwait, and Singapore.
9. Brazil invites all Members that do not notify the lifting of bans
and other changes to review their practices and bring them into conformity with
the SPS Agreement. We also invite other Members that have difficulties with
this issue to bring their cases and experience to the Committee.
__________