WT/DS613/1  
G/L/1430  
G/SPS/GEN/2056  
 
29 July 2022  
(22-5714) Page: 1/4 
  Original: English  
 
 
EUROPEAN UNION – MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION OF CITRUS FRUIT 
FROM SOUTH AFRICA  
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY SOUTH AFRICA  
The following communication, received on  27 July 2022 , from the delegation of South Africa  to the 
delegation of the European Union , is circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with 
Article 4.4 of the DSU.  
 
_______________  
 
 
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the European Union (EU) pursuant 
to Article  XXIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 (GATT 1994), Article 4 of the 
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), and Article 11 
of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Me asures (SPS Agreement), 
concerning the EU's regime governing the importation of citrus fruit from South Africa.  
 
As this request concerns perishable products, South Africa also makes this request pursuant to 
Article 4.8 of the DSU and reserves its rights t hereunder.  
 
Pursuant to Article 4.4 of the DSU, South Africa describes below the reasons for this request, 
including the identification of the measure at issue and an indication of the legal basis for the 
complaints.  
 
I IDENTIFICATION OF THE MEASURE AT ISSUE  
The measure at issue is the import restrictions imposed by the EU on citrus fruit from South Africa. 
In particular, the EU imposes phytosanitary requirements relating to Thaumatotibia leucotreta  (false 
codling moth) on the importation of S outh African citrus fruit.  
Until recently, South African citrus fruit was freely imported to the EU provided that it was subject 
to an effective systems approach or another effective post -harvest treatment to ensure freedom 
from false codling moth. Accordi ngly, South Africa developed an effective systems approach, the 
"Citrus Systems Approach". Oranges and other citrus products have been exported from South Africa 
to the EU without significant problems under this systems approach.  
Recently, the EU has made abrupt and radical changes to the applicable phytosanitary requirements 
for the importation of oranges and other citrus products from South Africa. As of 14 July 2022, the 
EU now requires, for the first time, that imports of citrus fruit must undergo speci fied mandatory 
cold treatment processes and precooling steps for specific periods (up to 25 days of cold treatment) 
before importation. In cases, these processes must be conducted in the exporting country before 
the consignments are shipped. These phytosan itary requirements apply to all imports, irrespective 
of whether the importing Member has an effective systems approach like South Africa's "Citrus 
Systems Approach" or has another effective post -harvest treatment to ensure freedom from false 
codling moth.   
The EU's new requirements impose significant changes on the importation of citrus fruit. The EU, 
however, only provided a 23 -day period for implementation of these new requirements. Moreover, 
these changes are being introduced in the middle of the export  season, making implementation even 
more difficult and time -sensitive.  WT/DS613/1 • G/L/1430 • G/SPS/GEN/2056  
 
- 2 - 
 
  In addition, there are numerous shipments of citrus fruit en route  to the EU with phytosanitary 
certificates issued between the entry into force of the measure and its date of applicat ion, that is, 
from 24 June 2022 to 14 July 2022, which are based on the EU's then prevailing requirements and 
South Africa's existing systems approach. These shipments will reach the EU after 14 July 2022, by 
which time the EU's new phytosanitary requireme nts will apply. The extremely short 23 -day period 
for implementation1 did not allow sufficient time for producers in South Africa to adapt to the EU's 
new requirements and for South Africa's National Plant Protection Organization (Department of 
Agricultur e, Land Reform and Rural Development) to have a certification procedure in place that 
would be adequate to certify compliance with the new requirements.  
The EU's measure is contained in the following instruments:  
(i) Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament of the Council of 26 October 
2016 on protective measures against pests of plants, amending Regulations (EU) No 
228/2013, (EU) No 652/2014 and (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and 
of the Council and repealing Council Directives 69/464 /EEC, 74/647/EEC, 93/85/EEC, 
98/57/EC, 2000/29/EC, 2006/91/EC and 2007/33/EC – which establishes rules to 
determine the phytosanitary risks posed by any species, strain or biotype of pathogenic 
agents, animals or parasitic plants injurious to plants or pla nt products ('pests') and 
measures to reduce those risks to an acceptable level;  
(ii) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 of 28 November 2019 
establishing uniform conditions for the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 of 
the European Parli ament and the Council, as regards protective measures against pests 
of plants, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 690/2008 and amending 
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 – which lists the EU's quarantine 
pests, protected zone quara ntine pests and the EU's regulated non -quarantine pests, 
and the measures on plants, plant products and other objects to reduce the risks of 
those pests to an acceptable level;  
(iii) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/959 of 16 June 2022 amending Annex  
VII to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 as regards requirements for the 
introduction into the Union of certain fruits of Capsicum (L.), Citrus L., Citrus sinensis 
Pers., Prunus persica (L.) Batsch and Punica granatum L. – which amends the measures 
on plants, plant products and other objects to reduce the risks of those pests to an 
acceptable level  set out in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 of 28 
November 2019 described in item (ii) above ; 
(iv) EFSA Journal, Scientific Opinion, Commodity Risk assessment of Citrus L. fruits from 
South Africa for Thaumatotibia leucotreta under a systems approach, 8 July 2021  – 
which assesses the likelihood of pest freedom from false codling moth on South African 
citrus fruit at the point of entry in the EU c onsidering South Africa's systems approach; 
and  
(v) European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, Pest Risk Analysis for 
Thaumatotibia leucotreta , 21-26630, September 2013 – which assesses, among other 
things, the probability of entry, establishme nt, introduction, and spread of the pest, as 
well as the potential economic consequences and pest risk management options.  
South Africa specifies that it is requesting these consultations concerning the EU's import regime on 
citrus fruit from South Africa as contained in the above instruments, as well as with respect to any 
other instrument , modifying, supplementing, complementing, developing, or in any manner in 
addition to or relating to those expressly referred to above.   
 
 
1 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/959 of 16 June 2022 amending Annex VII to 
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 as regards requirements for the introduction into the Union of 
certain fruits of Capsicum (L.), Citrus L., Citrus sinensis Pers., Prunus persica (L.) Batsch and Punica granatum 
L. was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 21 June 2022 (L165, Volume 65, see also 
G/SPS/N/EU/545/Add.1).  Pursuant to Article 2 of this regulation, it entered into force only three days  later, on 
24 June 2022, and it started to apply 20 days afterwards, as of 14 July 2022.  WT/DS613/1 • G/L/1430 • G/SPS/GEN/2056  
 
- 3 - 
 
  In addition, t his request for consultations is intended to address current EU laws, regulations, policies 
and practices, as well as any changes or amendments to those laws, regulations, policies or practices 
that may be in process or may be implemented in the future.  
 
II LEGAL BASIS FOR THE COMPLAINT  
South Africa has significant concerns as to whether the overall changes to this regime are justified. 
As explained in more detail below, the new EU's requirements are not based on science, lack 
technical justification, are discr iminatory, and are more trade -restrictive than necessary to achieve 
their objective, among other things.  
 
The EU's import regime on South African citrus fruit as described above appears to be inconsistent 
with the EU's obligations under the Agreement Esta blishing the World Trade Organization (WTO 
Agreement). In particular, the EU's measure would appear to be:  
 
(i) inconsistent with Article 1.1 of the SPS Agreement, as it is a phytosanitary measure 
under the SPS Agreement that is not "applied in accordance with  the provisions of this 
Agreement";  
(ii) inconsistent with Article 2.2 of the SPS Agreement, as it is not "based on scientific 
principles", it is "maintained without sufficient scientific evidence", and it is not "applied 
only to the extent necessary to protec t … plant life or health";  
(iii) inconsistent with Articles 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 of the SPS Agreement, to the extent that a 
relevant international standard exists and the EU has failed to base its measure on it or 
to provide scientific justification to deviate from  it; 
(iv) inconsistent with Articles 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 of the SPS Agreement, as it is not "based on 
an assessment, as appropriate to the circumstances, of the risks to … plant life or health" 
and does not "take into account" the factors listed in Articles 5.2 and 5.3 of the SPS 
Agreement;  
(v) inconsistent with Articles 5.5 and 2.3 of the SPS Agreement, to the extent that the EU 
makes "arbitrary or unjustifiable distinctions in the levels it considers appropriate in 
different situations" and "discrimina te[s] between Members where identical or similar 
conditions prevail";  
(vi) inconsistent with Article 5.6 of the SPS Agreement, as the EU's measure is "more trade -
restrictive than required";  
(vii) not covered by Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement, as the EU is not in a situation "where 
relevant scientific evidence is insufficient"; and, in any event, the EU does not comply 
with any of the requirements set forth in this provision;  
(viii)  inconsistent with Articles 6.1 and 6.2 of the SPS Agreement, as the EU fails to adapt its 
import regime for South African citrus fruit to the "phytosanitary characteristics of the 
area … to which the product is destined";  
 
(ix) inconsistent with Article 7, and paragraph 2 of Annex B to the SPS Agreement, because, 
in a situation in which  no "urgent ci rcumstances" apply, the EU  does not allow a 
reasonable interval between the publication of a phytosanitary regulation and its entry 
into force in order to allow time for producers in exporting Members, and particularly in 
developing country Members, like South Africa, to adapt their products and methods of 
production to the requirements of the importing Member;  
(x) inconsistent with Article 8 and Annex C of the SPS Agreement, to the extent that the EU 
does not comply with its obligations regarding control, ins pection and approval 
procedures, including, but not limited to, completion of procedures without undue delay, 
limitation of information requirements to what is necessary and reasonable, and that, 
whenever specifications of a product are changed subsequent to its control and 
inspection in light of the applicable regulations, the procedure for the modified product WT/DS613/1 • G/L/1430 • G/SPS/GEN/2056  
 
- 4 - 
 
  is limited to what is necessary to determine whether adequate confidence exists that the 
product still meets the regulations concerned;  
(xi) inconsiste nt with Article 10.1 and 10.2 of the SPS Agreement, because the EU did not 
take account of the special needs of South Africa, a developing country Member, in the 
preparation and application of the measure. In addition, in a situation in which the 
appropria te level of phytosanitary protection allows the scope for the phased 
introduction of new phytosanitary measures, the EU did not provide longer  
time-frames for compliance on products of interest to South Africa so as to maintain 
opportunities for its expor ts of citrus fruit.  
(xii) inconsistent with Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994, as the EU's measure constitutes a 
"restriction … on the importation" of citrus fruit from South Africa;  
(xiii)  inconsistent with Articles I:1 and III:4 of the GATT 1994, to the extent that the EU 
discriminates between like products from different origins;  
(xiv)  inconsistent with Article X:3(a) of the GATT 1994, as the EU fails to apply it in a "uniform, 
impartial and reasonable manner".  
South Africa notes that these consultations might give rise to o ther matters having legal implications 
that are not expressly stated in this request but relate to other WTO obligations of the EU. With a 
view to facilitating a wide -ranging exchange of views, South Africa notes that, if such were to be the 
case, these ma tters would also be covered by the scope of this request for consultations.  
*** 
I look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient date for 
consultations.  
 
 
 
__________