WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SPS/W/125
29 October 2002
(02-5933)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original:  English
CHINA'S TRANSITIONAL REVIEW MECHANISM
Questions to China from the European Communities in the context of the Transitional Review
Mechanism under Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of the People's Republic of China
The following communication, dated 25 October 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the European Communities, with the requ est that it be circulated to Members, for the
purposes of the Transitional Review to take place at the Committee's meeting on 7-8 November 2002.
_______________
Transparency
The EC would like to emphasise the importance of transparency with regard to the proper
functioning of the SPS Agreement.  The obligations under Article 7 of the Agreement to 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.  Members shall notify all
proposed measures that are not in accordance with international standards, guidelines or
recommendations issued by Codex Alimentarius, OIE or IPPC.
An important aspect of notifying is to do it before the measures are adopted so as to leave
time for third country comments to be taken into account.
Emphasising the importance of transparency in the SPS Agreement, the EC welcomes China's
implementation of the notification requirements in the Agreement during the first months of its WTO
Membership.  The EC took note that China, after having submitted 140 notifications pursuant to
section 14 of the Protocol of Accession to WTO, has so far made 15 notifications under the SPS
Agreement.  The EC considers that the Chinese notifications have contributed to the proper
functioning of the Agreement and have offered the EC, and other WTO Members, an opportunity to
study new Chinese regulations.  However, the EC has some concerns about the fact that 67 of these
notifications limit the EC exports to China.
The EC would like to encourage China to cont inue its implementation of SPS notification
requirements.
With this regard:
• What has China done to ensure that all sanitary and phytosanitary measures still in
force after the accession of China to WTO are accessible to the knowledge of the
Members?
• Has China put in place a minimum time-frame for allowing comments on proposed
sanitary or phytosanitary regulations - including control and inspection procedures,G/SPS/W/125
Page 2
production and quarantine treatments, pesticide and veterinary drug residues approval
procedure, and risk assessment procedures?
Transposition and application - international standards and consistency
The EC emphasises the importance of the obligation under Article 3.2 and Article 5 of the
Agreement for WTO Members to use relevant interna tional standards as a basis for their sanitary and
phytosanitary measures.  The EC would like to emphasise that the sanitary and phytosanitary
measures not in accordance with international st andards, guidelines and recommendations issued by
Codex Alimentarius, OIE and IPPC, and which may have a significant impact on trade, shall be
justified on the basis of a risk assessment.
With this regard:
• What policy and what schedule has China envisaged to align Chinese sanitary and
phytosanitary measures with relevant international standards where appropriate?
• Has China based the sanitary and phytosanitary measures on risk assessment when
these measures do not conform to international standard guidelines or
recommendations?
To avoid unnecessary barriers to trade, the uniform and consistent application of sanitary and
phytosanitary measures is vital.
With this regard:
• How does China ensure a consistent and uniform application of their sanitary and
phytosanitary measures throughout their country, avoiding unnecessary additionalregional/local regulations and standards imposed by regional/local authorities?
• What has China done to ensure that sanitary and phytosanitary measures are based on
scientific principles and are not maintained without scientific evidence?
Transposition and application - non-discrimination and necessity
The EC emphasises the importance of the spirit of the SPS Agreement that reserves the right
of WTO Members to take sanitary and phytosanitary measures at the level they consider appropriate
in order to meet the appropriate level of protection against risks to human life or health, or to animal
and plant life or health.  It is equally important that such measures take into account the objective of
minimising negative trade effects and are not more trade-restrictive than required to achieve the
appropriate level of protection.
With this regard:
• To what extent has China unified sanitary and phytosanitary measures applied to
domestic and imported products?
• Can China justify the immediate ban on a ll food products from one Member State of
the EC following a first evidence of non- conformity with the Chinese regulation?G/SPS/W/125
Page 3
Furthermore, China has recently revised its health certification system and expanded the
scope of products that are subject to it.  The EC has some concerns as regards the coverage of this
new regime as well as the scientific justification.
With this regard:
• Can China provide a full list of products subject to mandatory health certification?
• What has China done to ensure that the principle of non-discrimination with regard to
these products is fully respected?
• What has China done to eliminate multiple or duplicative control procedures and to
avoid imposing requirements exclusively on imported products?
• What has China done to ensure that the same conformity assessment procedures
apply to both imported and domestic products?
Unexpected difficulties
The EC would like to emphasise that in order to avoid unnecessary barriers to trade, WTO
Members should choose, in cases where alternatives to meet chosen objectives exist, the less
trade-restrictive regulatory measure.  The EC is concerned that this does not seem to have been the
case with regard to Chinese notifications concerning food and cosmetics.
With this regard:
• Has China considered other less trade-restrictive means to achieve the objective of
consumer protection and information?
• Has China taken into account relevant international standards by the Codex
Alimentarius and OIE?
To avoid unnecessary technical barriers to trade, the uniform and consistent application of
sanitary and phytosanitary measures is vital.  This seems to have not been the case for some EC
exporters that have faced situations where different departments have been administering slightly
different rules on the same product or ingredients or that there have been inconsistencies with regard
to the rules.  The EC would like to encourage China to ensure the uniform and consistent application
of its sanitary and phytosanitary measures
Furthermore, the EC reiterates the importance of Article 2.2 of the Agreement that obliges
Members to base sanitary and phytosanitary measures on scientific principles taking into account
relevant process and production method, relevant inspection and sampling methods.  It is of great
importance that the scientific basis of measures is justified where appropriate.
With this regard:
• Why does China not think that the internationally recognised standards (WHO and
OIE) in connection with ingredients derived from cattle and sheep tissues coming
from countries and regions affected by BSE do not fulfil the level of protection set upby China?G/SPS/W/125
Page 4
• Can China explain the scientific basis for deviating from the existing international
standards, as required in Article 2 of the SPS Agreement, for the measures introducedvia G/SPS/CHN/3, 4, 6 and 7 which relate to import restrictions on a range of
products related to BSE?
• What is the level of protection applied by China to the imports in comparison with the
level of protection applied to national production?
• What is the scientific justification for this?
• Has China considered other less trade restrictive alternatives?
How does China ensure that a proportional response in accordance with Article 5 of the SPS
Agreement is adopted to risk?  For example, could China explain the proportionality of the measureintroduced via G/SPS/CHN/5, which introduced a measure restricting imports on all foodstuffs of
animal origin from another member country as a response to a single positive interception of a
veterinary drug residue in a single consignment of casings and with no positive interceptions having
been reported in other food products before the measure was introduced?
During the SPS Committee meeting of June 2002, the representative from China defended the
measures taken via G/SPS/CHN/5 by referring to Ar ticle 5.7 of the Agreement.  Does China still
invoke Article 5.7 when defending this measure and can this be defence be elaborated?
 
 Can China explain why measures in line with Article 6 of the SPS Agreement, i.e. the
application of the principle of regionalisation, were not applied in G/SPS/CHN/12 which introduced a
measure restricting imports of porcine origin from France due to Classical Swine Fever?  Under whatcircumstances would China seek to apply such provisions?
__________