Note by the Secretariat[1]

1  Introduction

1.1.  At its meeting of 15-16 October 1997, the SPS Committee adopted a provisional procedure to monitor the process of international harmonization and the use of international standards, guidelines or recommendations, as provided for in Articles 3.5 and 12.4 of the SPS Agreement. The Committee extended the provisional monitoring procedure in 1999, 2001, and 2003, and revised the procedure in October 2004.^[2] In 2006, the Committee agreed to extend the provisional procedure indefinitely, and to review its operation as an integral part of the periodic review of the operation and implementation of the Agreement under Article 12.7.^[3] The procedure was reviewed as part of the Third Review of the Agreement^[4], and again in the context of the Fourth[5] and Fifth Review.[6]

1.2.  In the context of the Sixth Review, New Zealand submitted a follow-up proposal on monitoring the process of international harmonization[7], aimed at assisting ISSBs moving forward in terms of monitoring international standards, providing them with data to support their standard-setting activities.[8] The report of the Sixth Review, adopted in March 2025, includes several recommendations on Cooperation with the international standard-setting bodies (ISSBs).[9]

1.3.  The Committee has previously considered twenty-six annual reports on the monitoring procedure.^[10] These reports summarize several standards-related issues that the Committee has considered, and the responses received from the relevant standard-setting organizations. This current report includes the issues that were considered in the June and November 2024, and March 2025 Committee meetings.[11]

2  New Issues

2.1.  Since the 2024 Annual Report, one new issue has been raised under this procedure.

2.1  Brazil - Information on STCs raised in the SPS Committee related to non-compliance with international standards

2.2.  At the November 2024 Committee meeting, Brazil referred to the upcoming Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) meeting, highlighting that international standards were among the main issues discussed in the SPS Committee. Brazil noted that developing and least developed Members had to allocate scarce resources to comply with requirements by wealthier Members. Brazil encouraged WTO Members to continuously reaffirm their commitment to international standards and ensure that the scientific basis for their measures was robust. Brazil also invited Members to engage in discussions within the realm of the three sisters including the upcoming CAC meeting in Geneva.

3  previous issues

3.1.  Since the 2024 Annual Report, there was further discussion on three issues previously raised under this procedure regarding: (i) HPAI restrictions not consistent with the WOAH international standard; (ii) ASF restrictions not consistent with the WOAH international standard; and (iii) an Update on WOAH BSE negligible risk status.

3.1  HPAI restrictions not consistent with the WOAH international standard

3.2.  At the June 2024 Committee meeting, the European Union reiterated its concern that a significant number of Members continued to disregard their obligations under Article 6 of the SPS Agreement and Annex C thereto by imposing country-wide trade bans after local outbreaks of avian influenza. The European Union indicated that these bans were not scientifically justified if effective movement controls were in place and there was no justification to wait one year or more to restore disease-free status. The European Union asked Members to respect their obligations on regionalization under the SPS Agreement and to follow WOAH recommendations.

3.3.  Türkiye expressed gratitude to the European Union for bringing attention to this matter and highlighted that it had encountered a similar situation since achieving HPAI-free status in August 2023. Türkiye highlighted that some Members had not recognized its disease-free status. Türkiye encouraged these Members to follow WOAH guidelines and adopt less restrictive measures.

3.4.  At the November 2024 Committee meeting, the European Union reiterated its concern that a significant number of Members continued to disregard their obligations under Article 6 of the SPS Agreement and Annex C thereto by imposing country-wide trade bans after local outbreaks of avian influenza. The European Union indicated that these bans were not scientifically justified if effective movement controls were in place and there was no justification to wait one year or more to restore disease-free status. The European Union asked Members to respect their obligations on regionalization under the SPS Agreement and to follow WOAH recommendations.

3.5.  At the _March 2025 Committee meeting, the European Union reiterated its concern that a significant number of Members continued to disregard their obligations under Article 6 of the SPS Agreement and Annex C by imposing country-wide trade bans after local outbreaks of avian influenza. The European Union indicated that these bans were not scientifically justified if effective movement controls were in place, as had been highlighted in the Thematic Session on Innovative Regulatory Approaches to Facilitate Safe Trade, and there was no justification to wait one year or more to restore disease-free status. The European Union asked Members to follow WOAH standards and apply the regionalization principle.

3.2  ASF restrictions not consistent with the WOAH international standard

3.6.  At the June 2024 Committee meeting, the European Union pointed out inconsistencies in the application of WOAH standards related to ASF. The European Union considered that many Members disregarded the WOAH Terrestrial Code guidance for the identification, treatment, and certification of tradable products and zoning. The European Union noted that ASF could be managed effectively to ensure that legitimate trade was not the cause of any outbreaks, as discussed in the 2021 Committee Thematic Session on ASF. ASF had been a disease affecting several Members, and it was a shared interest to maintain free and safe trade of pork and pork products. The European Union invited Members to address the issue of country-wide bans and implement science-based, rational, and proportionate import policies.

3.7.  At the November 2024 Committee meeting, the European Union pointed out inconsistencies in the application of WOAH standards related to ASF. The European Union considered that many Members disregarded the WOAH Terrestrial Code guidance for the identification, treatment, and certification of tradable products and zoning. The European Union noted that ASF could be managed effectively to ensure that legitimate trade was not the cause of any outbreaks. ASF had been a disease affecting several Members, and it was a shared interest to maintain free and safe trade of pork and pork products. The European Union invited Members to address the issue of country-wide bans and implement science-based, rational, and proportionate import policies.

3.8.  At the _March 2025 Committee meeting, the European Union pointed out inconsistencies in the application of WOAH standards related to ASF. The European Union considered that many Members disregarded the WOAH Terrestrial Code on the identification, treatment, and certification of tradable products and zoning. Referring to the Thematic Session on Innovative Regulatory Approaches to Facilitate Safe Trade, the European Union noted that zoning could be applied effectively and ASF could be managed to ensure that legitimate trade was not the cause of any outbreaks. ASF was a disease affecting several Members, and it was a shared interest to maintain free and safe trade of pork and pork products. The European Union invited Members to work on substituting country-wide trade bans with science-based, rational, and proportionate measures.

3.3  Update on WOAH BSE negligible risk status

3.9.  At the June 2024 Committee meeting, referring to its interventions in previous Committee meetings, Canada reiterated that it had been recognized by WOAH as a negligible risk country for BSE since May 2021. Canada requested that Members who had not yet done so remove the remaining BSE-related restrictions on Canadian cattle, beef, and beef products based on its WOAH status. Canada emphasized Article 3 of the SPS Agreement, highlighting the importance of basing SPS measures on international standards, including those established by WOAH.

4  Responses Received From The Relevant Standard-Setting Organizations[12]

4.1.  Under the agenda item on Monitoring of the use of international standards at the June 2024 Committee meeting, Codex reported on its monitoring of the use and impact of Codex standards. 2022 and 2023 surveys had provided valuable insights into the utilization and effects of these standards. The 2022 survey report was available on the Codex website, and the 2023 survey report would be published soon. In addition, Codex had conducted a case study in early 2023 on the use and impact of the code of practice for the prevention of mycotoxins in cereals, the results of which would be made available on its website. Moreover, Codex was discussing with the SPS and TBT teams in the Secretariat to incorporate information from the notification systems to enhance the monitoring of Codex standards. At the _March 2025 Committee meeting, Codex provided an update on monitoring activities, whereby Codex measured the status and degree of Codex standard implementation as well as evaluated the reasons for which Codex standards may not be implemented by some Codex members, looking at corrective measures. Codex used surveys for that purpose and announced a possible upcoming survey on regional and international standards on MRLs. Codex emphasized that searching for the use of Codex standards did not necessarily mean integration into domestic legislation and could encompass how they were used in domestic voluntary standards (for example as import tolerances in the case of MRLs).

4.2.  Under that same agenda item, at the November 2024 Committee meeting WOAH expressed its commitment to monitoring the uptake of its international standards, noting that data collection and analysis would assist in gaining a better understanding of implementation of its standards, including the challenges that Members faced when applying them. To date, WOAH's Observatory programme had produced its first annual report and a study analysing the barriers preventing WOAH members from implementing standards in relation to zoning. This was the first time that WOAH had provided a global perspective of WOAH members' implementation of standards, and these reports raised awareness of some of the current gaps in the implementation of international standards and suggested how they could be filled by improving practices at the national level. Highlighting the importance of submitting quality data and information, WOAH encouraged Members to submit good quality information that allowed a meaningful analysis and could lead to a good evaluation of the level of implementation of international standards. To this end, WOAH was contributing to the improvement of ePing in collaboration with IPPC and Codex. At the _March 2025 Committee meeting, WOAH updated the Committee on the work of its observatory, announcing a second monitoring report dedicated to trade and sanitary measures, self-declaration and official status, movements control, zoning and compartmentalisation, use of antimicrobials and AMR, and One Health. WOAH also provided information about its observatory's thematic studies on zoning and animal welfare during transport by land and see. WOAH further noted the development of the observatory's digital platform would start in April 2025 to collect and analyze data for indicators.

4.3.  Also at the November 2024 Committee meeting, the IPPC informed the Committee that CPM‑19, to be held in March 2025, would address several topics including an assessment of the IPPC observatory, and provided updates on meetings of its observatory.

__________