G/TBT/N/PHL/183 - Draft Administrative Order

Ref. Ares(2014)3117078 - 23/09/2014
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
ENTERPRISE AND INDUSTRY DIRECTORATE-GENERAL
Single Market for Goods
Prevention of Technical Barriers
Brussels,
LP/NV - entre.3(2014)3297642
E-MAIL
To:
TBT Enquiry Point of the
Philippines
Copy
EU Delegation of the
Philippines
From:
Mr Giuseppe Casella
E-mail:
Telephone:
EU-WTO-TBT Enquiry Point E-mail:
[email protected]
+ 32 2 295 63 96
[email protected]
Number of pages:
1+4
Subject:
G/TBT/N/PHL/183 - Draft Administrative Order - Revised Rules
and Regulations Governing The Labeling of Prepackaged Food
Products
Further
Amending
Certain
Provisions
of
Administrative Order No. 88-B s. 1984 or the Rules and
Regulations Governing the Labeling of Pre-packaged Food
Products Distributed in the Philippines, and for Other Purposes
- EU comments
Message:
Dear Sir or Madam
Please find attached the comments from the European Union on the above-mentioned
notification.
Could you please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail? Thank you.
Yours faithfully
Casella
of Unit
Contaet;
Ms Lilia Petrova.
Telephone:(32-2) 2987762
E-mail ; [email protected]
Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles/Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (+32-2)299 11 11.
Office: N105 4/63. Telephone: direct line (+32-2)298 77 62. Fax: (+32-2)299 80 43.
E-mail: [email protected]
COMMENTS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING
NOTIFICATION GA*BT/N/PHL/183
DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER - REVISED RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE
LABELLING OF PRE-PACKAGED FOOD PRODUCTS FURTHER AMENDING CERTAIN
PROVISIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 88-B s. 1984 OR THE RULES AND
REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE LABELLING OF PRE-PACKAGED FOOD PRODUCTS
DISTRIBUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
The European Union (EU) would like to thank the Philippines for providing the
opportunity to comment on G/TBT/N/PHL/183 regarding draft Administrative Order Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the Labelling of Pre-packaged Food
Products Further Amending Certain Provisions of Administrative Order No. 88-B s.
1984 or the Rules and Regulations Governing the Labelling of Pre-packaged Food
Products Distributed in the Philippines, and for Other Purposes.
As a preliminary remark, the EU notes that the draft order was notified to the WTO on
5 August 2014 and the deadline for comments was set at 30 August 2014.
In this respect, the EU would like to recall that according to Article 2.9.4 of the TBT
Agreement, Members shall, without discrimination, allow reasonable time for other
Members to make comments on notified draft technical regulations. In its
recommendation G/TBT/9 of 13 November 2000, the TBT Committee agreed that the
normal time limit for comments on notifications should be at least 60 days.
Having examined the notified draft, the EU would like to raise the following issues:
1. Operator's information
Section VI, sub-section A, point 5 of the notified draft provides rules on the indication
of food operators' information (including manufacturer, repacker, packer, importer,
trader or distributor), and point 5 (c) specifically requires the declaration of the
complete name and address of the importer and the country of origin for imported
products.
Regarding the operator's information, point 5 (a) indicates that a locally manufactured
product must carry the name and address of the manufacturer, re-packer, packer,
importer, trader or distributor of the food. No such flexibility is given with respect to
imported products and in particular for wines. Point 5 (c) stipulates that for imported
products, the complete name and address of the importer and the country of origin
shall be declared. The EU considers that equal flexibility between imported and
domestically produced wines would take away any possible negative trade impact of
this clause. This equal treatment is provided for in the EU for wines (domestic
production or importation), authorizing that the indication of manufacturer, re-packer,
packer, importer, trader or distributor can be grouped together, if they concern the
same natural or legal person. Under these circumstances, the information about
distributors is generally considered as more relevant.
1
In this respect, the EU would like to recall Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement, which
states that: "Members shall ensure that in respect of technical regulations, products
imported from the territory of any Member shall be accorded treatment no less
favourable than that accorded to like products of national origin and to like products
originating in any other country."
Furthermore, from a regulatory perspective and in order to ensure the most efficient
reaction in case certain information about the product (in this case wine) needs to
reach the consumers quickly, it is important to ensure the declaration of the
information of the most relevant operator. For imported wines, importers, especially
for small or medium enterprises, may not be able to control the distribution across the
entire Philippines market. Rather, some key domestic distributors are usually in a
better position to monitor the market and directly engage with end consumers.
2. Country of origin labelling
Section VI, sub-section A, point 5 (c) of the notified draft requires the indication of the
country of origin of imported products. However, many imported products will be
specialities of a particular state or region and will include a statement like 'Produced
and bottled in
or 'Product of
The EU would like to know if such statements
would be considered as a declaration of origin by the Philippines.
3. Use of names of places
The EU considers that Section VII, point 0(1) of the notified draft, which allows the
use of the word "style", is incompatible with Article 23.1 of the Agreement on TradeRelated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) concerning wines and spirits.
Article 23.1 of TRIPS stipulates that "Each Member shall provide the legal means for
interested parties to prevent use of a geographical indication identifying wines for
wines not originating in the place indicated by the geographical indication in question
or identifying spirits for spirits not originating in the place indicated by the
geographical indication in question, even where the true origin of the goods is
indicated or the geographical indication is used in translation or accompanied by
expressions such as "kind", "type", "style", "imitation" or the like".
Therefore the EU would like to invite the Philippine authorities to consider either
excluding explicitly wines and spirits from Section VII, point 0(1) of the notified draft
or alternatively deleting the sentence "However, in the case of b), if the place cited is
in another country, it shall be qualified by the word "style" except when reference to
the place is accepted as a generic term for that product".
4. Allergens
Regarding allergens, the EU legislation establishes a list of food ingredients which
must be indicated on the label of foods as they are likely to cause adverse reactions
in susceptible individuals. It also provides for the possibility to exclude from the
labelling requirements ingredients of substances derived from ingredients
2
enumerated in this list for which it has been scientifically established that they are not
likely, under certain circumstances, to trigger allergic reactions.
In this context, cereals used for making distillates or ethyl alcohol of agricultural origin
for spirit drinks and other alcoholic beverages have been exempted from allergen
labelling as they were assessed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as
unlikely to trigger a severe allergic reaction in susceptible individuals1. Consequently,
given the scientific evidence (EFSA opinion), we would like to recommend a similar
exemption in Philippine law.
Moreover, according to studies carried out at international level, fish-based 'isinglass'
used for the clarification of wines is completely eliminated after filtration. Therefore,
the ED would also like to recommend a specific exemption for the labelling of this
substance for wines.
Finally, the EU would like to receive confirmation that, for the indication of allergens,
the indication 1contains' ('and not 'contains allergen') followed by the name of the
allergen would be sufficient.
5. Transition period
The EU appreciates that Section X of the notified draft will allow a twelve (12) months
transition period. However, given the complexity of the international supply chain of
EU products, the EU would like to ask the Philippine authorities to consider applying
a transitional period of a maximum of eighteen (18) months to facilitate the trade and
distribution of slower moving stocks.
The EU would be grateful if the above-mentioned comments could be taken into
account and replied to before the adoption of the notified draft.
1 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific
Opinion/nda op ei484_cereals in_distillates_ceps_en.pdf.3.pdf
3

Download Report