RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/SPS/W/83
8July1997
ORGANIZATION(97-2841)
Original: English Committee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures
OBSERVATIONS ONTHE NOTE BYTHE SECRETARIAT
ON"RISK ANALYSIS" (G/SPS/W/80)
Statement bytheEuropean Community attheMeeting of1-2July1997
1. ThenotebytheSecretariat on"Risk Analysis" dated 6March 1997(G/SPS/W/80) isintended,
inthewordsoftheSecretariat,"toprovidebackgroundinformationtofacilitatethetaskoftheCommittee
[indevelopingguidelinestofurtherthepracticalimplementationoftheprovisiononconsistencycontained
inArticle 5.5]. Itisnotintended toprovide alegalinterpretation oftheAgreement".
2. TheEuropean Community takes noteoftheintended purpose ofthepaper andappreciates the
background information provided bytheSecretariat, although suchinformation would notappear to
bedirectly relevant toArticle 5.5andtherefore totheongoing work oftheCommittee onthe
development ofguidelines.
3. TheEuropean Community alsofindsthatnotwithstanding thestated intention toprovide solely
background information, thenotegoesfurther anddoesindeed result inalegal interpretation of
provisions oftheSPSAgreement. Thenoteattempts infacttodefine concepts suchasriskanalysis
andriskmanagement andtoassociate them withseveral provisions oftheSPSAgreement. These
concepts arenotpresent assuchintheAgreement, andanyattempt torelate themtospecific provisions
willinevitably entail legalinterpretations ofsuchprovisions.
4. Itistherefore theveryapproach atthebasis oftheSecretariat 'snotewhich raises concerns
onthepartoftheEuropean Community. Inaddition, theEuropean Community would liketocomment
onanumber ofspecific points.
5. Riskassessment isdefined inparagraph 7as"primarily ascientific procedure toidentify the
existence andseverity ofpossible risks". TheEuropean Community ishereconcerned thatthissummary
interpretation makes noreference tothewell-defined concept androleofriskassessment intheSPS
Agreement (seeArticles 5.1,5.2andAnnex A)asabasis forMembers 'sanitary andphytosanitary
measures.
6. Riskmanagement isdefined inthenoteas"what isdonewiththeinformation resulting from
ariskassessment "(paragraph 7).According tothenote,it"involves aseries ofsteps. These include,
interalia,decisions regarding theacceptable levelofrisk; identification ofpossible options toreduce
oreliminate theidentified risk; evaluation andselection among these options; implementation ofthe
selected measures, asappropriate; andmonitoring andcontrol oftheeffectiveness oftheselected
measure" (paragraph 8).Aside from noting thattheabove-mentioned steps arenotpresent assuch
intheSPSAgreement, theEuropean Community would liketounderline thattheimpression isgiven
thatriskassessment isaphase which precedes thedetermination oftheappropriate levelofprotection.
Thisnotion isnotfound intheSPSAgreement, andtheEuropean Community wishes torecall that
theinapplicability oftheconcept ofriskassessment tothenotion ofappropriate levelofprotection
./.G/SPS/W/83
Page2
hasbeenthesubject ofextensive elucidation intheinformal work oftheChairman andtheCommittee
forthepreparation ofguidelines inaccordance withArticle 5.5.
7. Inparagraph 9,itisstated that"risk management, oratleastseveral elements ofit,are
addressed, interalia,inArticles 5.4,5.5and5.6.These provisions address thedecisions tobetaken
onwhatlevelofriskisacceptable, aswellaswhatmeasure isapplied toensure theselected levelof
protection". TheEuropean Community ishereparticularly concerned thattheimpression might be
given thatArticle 5.5deals withthedetermination ofthelevelofprotection orwiththeapplication
ofsanitary andphytosanitary measures.
8. Paragraph 11affirms further thatthesubject ofArticle 5.5is"thedetermination ofthelevel
ofsanitary andphytosanitary riskwhich aMember determines tobeacceptable inanyparticular
situation". However, areading ofArticle 5.5willshow thattheprovision doesnotregulate howa
Member determines itsappropriate levelofprotection; whatitprovides forisrather theobligation
forMembers toavoid arbitrary orunjustifiable distinctions inthelevels theyconsider tobeappropriate
indifferent situations, ifsuchdistinctions result indiscrimination ordisguised restrictions ontrade.
Intheview oftheEuropean Community, thisisquite adifferent scope thantheoneattributed to
Article 5.5intheSecretariat 'snote.
9. TheEuropean Community would liketorecall thatthepurpose oftheongoing work ofthe
Committee isnottointerpret theAgreement, nortomodify inanywaytherights andobligations of
Members under theAgreement, butrather tofurther thepractical implementation ofArticle 5.5.It
isforthispurpose thatMembers cooperate intheCommittee todevelop guidelines, anditisinthis
lightthattheEuropean Community hasexpressed theabove concerns onthenotecirculated bythe
Secretariat.