WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SPS/GEN/269/Rev.1
17 September 2001
(01-4348)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original:  Spanish
FMD MEASURES AFFECTING EXPORTS OF ARGENTINE PRODUCTS
Communication from Argentina Presented
at the 10-11 July 2001 Meeting
Revision
Introduction
Argentina hereby reports that, as of April 2001, the new Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock,
Fisheries and Food is Mr. Marcelo Regúnaga and the President of the National Agriculture and Food
Quality and Health Service (SENASA) is Dr. Bernardo Cané, who held the same office in this agency
from 1989 to 1996.  This reshuffle aims to promote information exchange and transparency,
especially as regards the development of pest and disease control programmes.
The new authorities have developed the "Na tional Foot-and-Mouth Disease Eradication Plan
2001-2005", which has been submitted to the authorities of multinational organizations, such as the
International Office of Epizootics (OIE), Inter- American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture
(IICA), Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO), the River Plate Basin Group and all countries
with which Argentina trades agricultural products.
In this connection, and to lend transparency to the development of this Plan, we wish to report
that, as planned, the first vaccination campaign for all bovine livestock (50 million head) located to
the north of the Rivers Barranca and Negro is nearing completion.  It should be recalled that
Patagonia is still a "Foot-and-Mouth Disease Free Zone where Vaccination is Not Practised".
Another critical issue dealt within the Plan is the movement of animals;  this has been
regulated by retention in zones of epidemiological restriction, thereby affecting even as important an
event as the International Agriculture and Livestock Show in Palermo, set to take place at the end of
this month.
Situation
The epidemiological situation which Argentina is currently going through has resulted in its
products being subjected to foreign market access restrictions in the form of unjustified sanitary
measures adopted by some importing Members.
These access restrictions are inconsistent with the obligations established within the
framework of the multilateral trading system, in  particular with the commitments in the WTO
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement).
This inconsistency stems from the fact that the measures in question lack sufficient scientific
grounds or risk analysis, or are disproportionate in relation to the established objectives and areG/SPS/GEN/269/Rev.1
Page 2
therefore inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 2.1, 3.1, 5.1 and other related Articles of the SPS
Agreement.
A full rationale for this submission from Argentina is presented below.
I. INTERNATIONAL RULES OF REFERENCE
The mainstay of one of the objectives of the SPS Agreement, namely preventing sanitary and
phytosanitary measures from being used as unjustif ied restrictions to inte rnational trade, is the
obligation for any sanitary or phytosanitary measure to be based on scientific evidence (as required by
Article 2.2 of the SPS Agreement).
This guiding principle is reflected in a series of obligations for Members which regulate the
application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures.  One such obligation is to ensure that their
measures are based on an assessment of risks (provided for in Article 5.1), the intrinsic relation of
which to scientific evidence has been widely acknowledged in WTO case law.
The other obligation is to harmonize, insofar as is possible and where applicable, sanitary and
phytosanitary measures on the basis of international standards, guidelines and recommendations.  To
that end, both the preamble to the SPS Agreement and Articles 3.1, 3.4 et seq . refer to harmonization
as an element which facilitates trade and encourage Members to play a full part in international
technical fora (Codex Alimentarius Commission - CODEX, International Office of Epizootics - OIE,
International Plant Protection Convention - IPPC) in  order to promote the development and periodic
review of standards.
With regard to harmonization on the basis of international standards, it should be emphasized
that the standards, guidelines and recommendatio ns of the competent international organizations
constitute the mandatory reference framework which Members should observe when adopting asanitary or phytosanitary measure.
Article 3.2 of the SPS Agreement stipulates that sanitary or phytosanitary measures which
conform to international standards, guidelines or recommendations shall be deemed to be necessary to
protect human, animal or plant life or health, and presumed to be consistent with the relevant
provisions of this Agreement and of GATT 1994.
Likewise, according to existing WTO case law on the matter, both the Panels and the
Appellate Body consider these provisions as the scie ntific parameters to be taken into consideration in
settling disputes relating to the determination of whether or not a sanitary or phytosanitary measure is
consistent with the obligations set out in the SPS Agreement.
This statement does not mean that Members may not depart from the standards set out in the
international rules of reference;  rather it means that, when introducing a sanitary or phytosanitary
measure which involves departing from these regulations, Members must furnish sufficient scientific
justification (pursuant to Article 3.3 of the SPS Agreement).
II. INTERNATIONAL ANIMAL HEALTH CODE OF THE INTERNATIONAL OFFICE
OF EPIZOOTICS (OIE)
The international organization of reference for animal health is the International Office of
Epizootics.  This Office drew up and approved th e International Animal Health Code (hereinafter
referred to as the "Code"), Chapter 2.1.1 of which sets out precautionary measures relating to foot-and-mouth disease (FMD).G/SPS/GEN/269/Rev.1
Page 3
This Chapter first of all establishes the criter ia for placing countries/zones in the different
FMD sanitary categories.  Secondly, it stipulates the products and by-products considered likely to
transmit the FMD virus.  Thirdly, it states the FMD-related requirements to be implemented by the
sanitary authorities of importing countries, taking two variables into consideration, namely the
sanitary status of the product’s country of origin and the sanitary risk of the export product.
In an endeavour to prevent FMD from spreading to their territory, some WTO Members have
adopted sanitary measures which are inconsistent with the provisions of Chapter 2.1.1 of the Code.
(a) Products presenting no risk of transmitting the FMD virus
Given that the list of risk products in Chapter 2.1.1 (Article 2.1.1.8) is exhaustive, all products
not expressly mentioned therein, such as equine meat , poultry meat, plant products in general, etc., are
considered to be "no-risk".
Any provision impeding the entry of these products or requiring certification of a risk
mitigation procedure, and for which sufficient scientific evidence and the corresponding risk analysis
supporting the measure are not furnished, therefore constitutes a breach of the obligations under theSPS Agreement.
(b) Products subject to risk mitigation procedures
Pursuant to Chapter 2.1.1 of the Code, the animals, products and by-products from FMD-
infected countries and zones which, once they have complied with the corresponding risk mitigationprocedures, must be accepted by the importing countries, are as follows:
• Domestic ruminants and pigs (under Article 2.1.1.11);
• semen of domestic ruminants and pigs (under Article 2.1.1.15);
• in vivo  derived embryos of cattle (under Article 2.1.1.17);
• fresh meat of bovines, excluding feet, head and viscera (under Article 2.1.1.23);
• meat products of domestic ruminant s and pigs (under Article 2.1.1.24);
• milk and cream (under Article 2.1.1.26);
• blood and meat meal from domestic or  wild ruminants and pigs (under
Article 2.1.1.28);
• wool, hair, bristles, raw hides and skins from domestic or wild ruminants and pigs
(under Article 2.1.1.29);
• straw and forage (under Article 2.1.1.30);
• skins and trophies from wild animals susceptible to FMD (under Article 2.1.1.32).
Any ban on the import of those products/by-products or import requirement in addition to or
different from the risk mitigation procedures set out in this Chapter and lacking either sufficient
scientific evidence or the corresponding risk analysis therefore constitutes a breach of the
commitments under the SPS Agreement.G/SPS/GEN/269/Rev.1
Page 4
Consequently, as the Argentine sanitary authorities are in a position to certify the risk
mitigation procedures established for the designated products, any additional restriction imposed is
unjustified.
With regard to plant products  in particular, Article 2.1.1.30 establishes the risk mitigation
procedures applicable when exporting straw and forage from FMD-infected countries/zones.  In the
light of the above comments on the exhaustive nature of the list and as straw and forage are the only
products of plant origin specified in Chapter 2.1.1, all other plant products are considered as not
presenting any risk of spreading the FMD virus.
It should also be emphasized that the Co mmuniqué entitled "International standards
concerning the risks of foot-and-mouth disease associated with trade in animals and animal products",
signed by the Director-General of the OIE in April 2001, confirms Article 2.1.1.30.
This Communiqué lists the animals and products that present a risk of transmitting the FMD
virus.  The plant products category includes only straw and forage, in compliance withArticle 2.1.1.30 of the Code.  It also states that other commodities, including cereal grains, fruit,
vegetables and tubers, are not considered by the Code as likely to present such a risk.
In the case of plant products, a clear distinction is therefore made between:
• Straw and forage:  these are subject to risk mitigation procedures to ensure that the
FMD virus is inactivated.
• Other plant products:  these present no risk of transmitting FMD and should not,
therefore, be subject to further requirements.
The above-mentioned document was submitted by the OIE to the WTO Committee on
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures;  document G/SPS/GEN/240 therefore reiterates and reaffirms
the terms of the Communiqué of the OIE Director-General.
The WTO document adds that outbreaks of FMD in countries that had previously eradicated
the disease, for example South America, in no way bring into question the sanitary policies forinternational trade recommended by the OIE.  It also  highlights that, in providing this information, the
OIE wishes to help WTO Members to fulfil their obligations arising from the SPS Agreement.
III. APPEAL BY ARGENTINA
As mentioned above, several of the access restrictions imposed on Argentine products do not
respect the criteria set out in the corresponding OIE regulations.  Given that no Members have proved
that they have sufficient scientific evidence, nor made available to Argentina risk analyses adequately
supporting their measures, they are not legally entitled to adopt measures implying a level of
protection higher than that achieved by international measures.
Such measures are therefore inconsistent with Article 2.2 of the SPS Agreement, since they
are not "based on scientific principles", Article 3.1 of the Agreement, since they are not based oninternational standards, guidelines or recommendations, and Article 5.1, since they are not based on
an assessment of risks.
Therefore, in the light of this inconsistenc y and the serious injury that it is causing to
Argentine exports, Members are hereby reminded of the need to bring domestic sanitary provisionsG/SPS/GEN/269/Rev.1
Page 5
into line with the commitments established under the SPS Agreement as soon as possible in order to
strengthen the close-knit relationship that should exist between sanitary measures and scientific
evidence.
__________