G/SPS/GEN/1976   
9 November 2021  
(21-8497)  Page: 1/2 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: Spanish  
 
  
PANAMA'S RESTRICTIONS REGARDING THE PROCEDURE TO REGAIN MARKET ACCESS  
FOR PERUVIAN POTATOES AND  ONIONS (STC NO. 512) 
COMMUNICATION FROM PERU  
The following communication, received on 8 November 2021, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegation of Peru. 
 
_______________  
 
 
1.  Peru would like to express before WTO Members its trade concern regarding the suspension by 
Panama of imports of onions and potatoes for consumption from Peru and the undue delays in the 
phytosanitary efforts to restore trade in these products.  
2.  Peru wishes t o point out that Articles 2.2 and 5 of the WTO  SPS Agreement state that Members 
shall establish sanitary and phytosanitary measures only where they are applied, inter alia , to protect 
plants, and that such measures must be based on a risk assessment. Likew ise, Article 5.4 states 
that Members should take into account the objective of minimizing negative trade effects. However, 
we regret that Panama has not considered these provisions and that it has instead applied restrictive 
and unjustified measures to tra de in potatoes and onions.  
3.  With regard to trade in Peruvian onions, Panama failed to consider that this trade has amounted 
to over 19,000 metric tonnes since  2003, without any reports of pest interceptions since that date. 
Panama suspended the importation of this product in 2016. This suspension was based solely on an 
updated pest risk analysis (PRA), without there being any technical reason – as required under 
Article 5 of the SPS Agreement – for interrupting trade between the two Parties. It should be not ed 
that the PRA makes it possible to establish phytosanitary requirements for the importation of new 
products into our countries and/or update existing import requirements without paralyzing the 
existing trade flow. Such requirements may have the same resu lts or be stricter or less strict, and 
may even result in the repeal of existing rules. This step is also contrary to the principle of "technical 
justification" under the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), which states that the 
parties shoul d technically justify phytosanitary measures on the basis of conclusions reached by 
using an appropriate pest risk analysis or, where applicable, another comparable examination and 
evaluation of available scientific information.  
4.  Turning to trade in potatoe s for consumption, the importation of this product was suspended by 
Panama in 2009 following the interception of a pest in a consignment at destination. In May 2010, 
following an exchange of comments with its counterpart, Peru's phytosanitary authority sen t Panama 
a proposed phytosanitary protocol for the exportation of potatoes, to which no response has been 
received to date. In this context, there is no technical justification for not reopening the Panamanian 
market.  
5.  In accordance with Article 8 and Annex  C, sanitary and phytosanitary procedures, inter alia, must 
be undertaken and completed without undue delay, with information being provided to the interested 
party and requirements limited to what is reasonable and necessary. In this light, Peru has 
consistently provided technical information relating to the PRA in order to secure the reopening of 
the Panamanian market for potatoes and onions, without receiving any response from Panama's 
health authority concerning the results of its risk analysis, and has  continually been asked for the 
same information that was sent in good time by the Peruvian health authority, which has led to the 
process being unnecessarily and unjustifiably prolonged.  G/SPS /GEN/1976  
 
- 2 - 
 
  6.  Furthermore, despite the constant trade concerns raised in this Committee, Panama has so far 
kept its market closed for potatoes and onions and has not responded to Peru's communications.  
7.  In light of the foregoing, Peru believes that Panama is continuing to cause undue delays in the 
establishment of the phytosanitary i mport requirements that would enable the importation of 
Peruvian potatoes and onions to resume.  
8.  The measures applied by Panama have caused damage to exports of Peruvian potatoes and 
onions. The last year for which export figures for potatoes to Panama were  recorded, both in terms 
of volume and value, was 2009. The best year for the exportation of Peruvian potatoes to Panama 
was 2008, due to the fact that over 604 tonnes were sent, with a value of USD 249,000. However, 
exports of Peruvian potatoes to Panama decreased by around 69% in 2009.  
9.  Furthermore, in 2017, Peruvian fresh onion exports to Panama fell substantially both in terms of 
value and volume. By the end of that year, exports of this product had fallen by around 98.04% in 
relation to 2016 and, as a r esult, the annual average growth for the period 2012 -17 decreased 
by 53.17%, despite the fact that the export potential of this sector is USD 2.3 million.1 
10.  In light of the foregoing, and in order to prevent a violation of Articles 2, 5 and 8 and Annex C 
of the SPS Agreement, Peru requests Panama to reopen the market to Peruvian potato and onion 
exports and to avoid any other action that may unnecessarily prolong this process, thereby creating 
unnecessary and unjustified barriers to trade.  
__________  
 
1 According to the ITC's Export Potential Map for tariff heading 070310.