G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
8 June 2018  
(18-3573) Page: 1/10 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE  IMPLEMENTATION OF AR TICLE 6  
OF THE AGREEMENT ON THE APPLICATION OF S ANITARY  
AND PHYTOSANITARY ME ASURES  
NOTE BY THE SECRETAR IAT1 
Article 6 of the SPS Agreement requires that measures take into account pest - or disease -free 
areas or areas of low pest or disease prevalence. This concept is frequently referred to as 
"regionalization". At the 2 -3 April 2008 meeting, the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures adopted guidelines to further the practical implementation of Article 6.2 These guidelines 
are intended to provide assistance to Members in the implementation of Article 6 by improving 
transparency, exchange of information, predictability, confidence and credibility between importing 
and exporting Members.  
The guidelines req uire the Secretariat to prepare an annual report to the Committee on 
implementation of Article 6 based on the information provided by Members concerning:  
a. requests for recognition of pest - or disease -free areas or areas of low pest or disease 
prevalence;  
b. determinations on whether to recognize a pest - or disease -free area or area of low pest 
or disease prevalence; and/or  
c. Members' experiences in the implementation of Article 6 and the provision of relevant 
background information by Members on their decisions t o other interested Members.  
In addition, since the Committee decided to hold thematic sessions on regionalization in July 2017 
and March 2018, this report also includes information on these sessions in an additional section:  
d. Thematic sessions  on regionali zation.  
The report covers the period from 1 April 201 7 until 31 March 201 8, based on information 
provided by Members through notifications and from information presented during SPS  Committee 
meetings. This information was frequently provided under the agen da item "Pest - and or Disease -
Free Areas - Article 6". Relevant information provided under other agenda items is also included in 
the report. A list of notifications related to Article 6 is contained in section 4; section 5 lists the 
relevant specific trad e concerns.  
1  REQUESTS FOR RECOGNI TION OF PEST - OR DISEASE -FREE AREAS OR AREAS OF LOW 
PEST OR DISEASE PREV ALENCE  
1.1  July 201 7 meeting (G/SPS/R/8 7) 
1.1.1   Australia – Update on East West regional freedom for Mediterranean fruit fly 
(Ceratitis Capitata)  
1.1.  Australia announ ced that the Eastern states of Australia and the Ord River irrigation area of 
Western Australia were pest -free areas for Mediterranean fruit fly. In addition the Mediterranean 
                                                
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  
2 G/SPS/48.  G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 2 - 
 
  fruit fly had a limited distribution in Western Australia. These pest -free areas  were maintained 
through the regulatory control of host material from infested areas. The pest -free status of these 
areas was verified through absence records collected from Australia's national fruit fly trapping 
grid. 
1.1.2   Chile – Update on outbreak of Avian Influenza  
1.2.  Chile reiterated that the avian influenza outbreak that had occurred towards the end of 2016 
had been of low pathogenicity, not of high pathogenicity, and that it was in compliance with the 
OIE Terrestrial Code. Further, it had been declared free  from avian influenza in June 2017. Self -
defined export -restricted areas had been lifted, placing Chile in a position to export according to 
agreements currently in force with their trading partners.  
1.1.3   Costa Rica – Declaration of freedom from Velogenic Newca stle disease 
(G/SPS/GEN/1560)  
1.3.  Costa Rica provided information on the outbreak of Velogenic  Newcastle disease of April 
2015. After the implementation of control measures and epidemiological surveillance, the entire 
national territory had been declared free of this disease. Costa Rica referred Members to document 
G/SPS/GEN/1560 which described th e measures applied by their national services.  
1.1.4   Dominican Republic – Update on the Mediterranean fruit fly situation  
1.4.  The Dominican Republic informed the Committee that it had dealt with the outbreak of 
Mediterranean fruit fly, first detected in March 2015, and that it had been eradicated through 
declaration of a phytosanitary emergency, a control and eradication programme and a monitoring 
and surveillance system, in compliance with international norms. The Ministry of Agriculture 
announced that the Dominican  Republic was free from the Mediterranean fruit fly. The Dominican 
Republic thanked USDA, FAO, OIE, IICA, IAEA, and the Guatemalan and Mexican agencies for their 
help in eradicating this pest.  
1.1.5   Kazakhstan – Information on FMD -free areas  
1.5.  Kazakhstan provided the Committee with a brief history of the country's partnership with the 
OIE and its process of becoming a Member of the WTO. Kazakhstan informed the Committee that 
in 2017 Kazakhstan had been awarded the status of FMD -free zone where vaccination was 
practiced only in five regions. Kazakhstan emphasized the significant impact this had on its exports 
and on the number of investors showing interest in producing and processing meat in Kazakhstan. 
In addition, Kazakhstan was currently working to obtain other di sease -free statuses as well. In 
concluding, Kazakhstan emphasized the increasing role of agriculture in the development of 
Central Asia and other emerging regions.  
1.1.6   Paraguay – Recent recognition of health status by OIE  
1.6.  Paraguay provided updated information on recent resolutions from the OIE World Assembly 
of Delegates on the health status of the country with regard to classical swine fever and foot -and-
mouth disease (FMD). Paraguay informed the Committee that for the first time it had been 
recognized as a co untry free of classical swine fever and that two disease -free zones had been 
merged, leading to recognition of the country as free of FMD with vaccination. In addition, 
Paraguay noted that the country maintained its health status for the following diseases : 
insignificant risk for BSE, free of African horse sickness, and free of peste des petits ruminants 
(PPR). Paraguay emphasized the importance of the OIE resolutions to obtain access to new 
markets.  
1.2  November  2017  meeting (G/SPS/R/8 8) 
1.2.1   Dominican Republic – Freedom from Mediterranean fruit fly  
1.7.  The Dominican Republic informed the Committee that through resolution RS/MA/2017/11 of 
the Ministry of Agriculture it had been declared free of Mediterranean fruit fly. The Dominican 
Republic explained that this was base d on the ISPM with regard to the requirements for G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 3 - 
 
  establishing areas free of fruit fly, which required a minimum of three life cycles without any 
capture in the area to consider the pest eradicated.  
1.3  March 201 8 meeting (G/SPS/R/ 90) 
1.3.1   Dominican Republic – Freedom from Mediterranean fruit fly  
1.8.  The Dominican Republic informed the Committee that further to an outbreak of the 
Mediterranean fruit fly in March 2015 near Punta Cana, a technical committee had been formed 
with the assistance of the United States, FAO and  IAEA to address this issue. The Dominican 
Republic further indicated that through resolution RS/MA/2017/11 (July 2017) of the Ministry of 
Agriculture, it had been declared free from the Mediterranean fruit fly. A country -wide surveillance 
programme had al so been put in place for the early detection of fruit flies.  
2  DETERMINATION ON WHE THER TO RECOGNIZE A PEST - OR DISEASE -FREE AREA OR 
AREA OF LOW PEST OR DISEASE PREVALENCE  
2.1  July 201 7 meeting (G/SPS/R/87 ) 
2.1.1   Indonesia – Recognition of Mediterranean fruit fly free  region in Chile  
2.1.  Indonesia extended its appreciation to Chile's NPPO for providing transparent technical data 
and for their support during the field verification process carried out by Indonesian experts on the 
status of the Mediterranean fruit fly. In com pliance with Article 6 of the SPS Agreement, Indonesia 
had finalized a comprehensive assessment of Ceratitis capitata in the grape -growing areas in the 
Atacama Region, in Chile, after which it recognized the region as a pest -free production area for 
grapes . 
2.2.  Chile thanked Indonesia for recognizing the Atacama Region as free of Mediterranean fruit fly 
and stressed that the whole country was free of the fruit fly, as recognized by the relevant 
international bodies. Chile therefore called upon other countries t o also recognize Chile as a 
country free from the Mediterranean fruit fly.  
2.2  November  2017 meeting (G/SPS/R/8 8) 
2.3.  No Member reported on this issue.  
2.3  March 2018  meeting (G/SPS/R/ 90) 
2.4.  No Member reported on this issue.  
3  MEMBERS' EXPERIENCES  IN THE IMPLEMENTATIO N OF ARTICLE 6  
3.1  July 2017 meeting (G/SPS/R/87 ) 
3.1.1   Russian Federation - Possible scenario on African swine fever spread in the 
Eurasian region  
3.1.  The Russian Federation reiterated the importance of paying close attention to the spread of 
African swine fever (ASF). The Russian Federation expressed appreciation for the thematic session 
organized at the margins of the SPS Committee meeting on animal diseases regionalization and 
acknowledged the efforts of international organizations like OIE, IPPC, FAO and WTO in this area . 
The Russian Federation noted that since the previous SPS Committee, ASF had been introduced 
into the Czech Republic, and reiter ated its warning on said risk. The Russian Federation noted the 
possible introduction of the virus from third countries . The Ru ssian Federation invited Members to 
consider compartmentalization and cooperation between compe tent surveillance services. 
The Russian Federation thanked the European Union for their bilateral meeting and looked forward 
to further discussions in the future . G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 4 - 
 
  3.2.  The Chairperson reminded Members that information provided under the agenda item on 
information sharing  was aimed at sharing national experiences and information on relevant 
national SPS activities.  
3.3.  The European Union again expressed its objection to  the use of th e agenda item on 
information sharing for purposes other than providing information to Members on relevant 
activities. The European Union stated that the Russian Federation's repeated references to EU 
member States and speculations on ASF spread i n EU countries were neither pertinent nor 
appropriate. Furthermore, the European Union reported  that a limited number of ASF cases , in a 
limited area had been detected in the Czech Republic,  and that all necessary measures had been 
taken. As stated in the past, the European Union was confident in the effectiveness of its ASF -
related measures as well as in its participation and leadership in international cooperation and in 
the response against ASF.  
3.1.2   South Africa – Update on recent cases of animal diseases  
3.4.  South Africa provided information on two recent cases of animal diseases: (i) the detection 
and confirmation of African swine fever in free roaming pigs of smallholder farmers in two 
provinces in June and October 2016, and then in February and May 2017 in ne ighbouring 
provinces, on which investigations were ongoing and the outbreaks had not been closed; and (ii) 
the occurrence of outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N8) in four commercial 
poultry farms and in wild birds, which were not epidemiolo gically linked. Control measures were 
being implemented; compartments free of avian influenza had been established and maintained. 
South Africa informed the Committee that it had received a contagious bovine pleuropneumonia 
(CBPP) freedom status as well as  freedom of FMD and PPR.  
3.2  November 2017 meeting (G/SPS/R/88 ) 
3.2.1   Botswana – Information on FMD in Ngamiland  
3.5.  Botswana provided an update on the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the Sehithwa 
area of Ngamiland District, which had been detected in September 2 017 and notified to the WTO 
on 26 September 2017 through document G/SPS/GEN/1572. Botswana enumerated the measures 
it had taken to control the spread of the disease: (i) district wide clinical surveillance to determine 
the extent of the outbreak; (ii) prim o vaccination followed by booster vaccination; (iii) FMD 
vaccination coupled with surveillance; (iv) a total livestock movement ban and other movement 
restrictions; (v) slaughter of cattle under certain conditions. Botswana emphasised that the 
outbreak was  contained and did not affect beef trade in the OIE -recognized FMD -free zones of 
Botswana.  
3.2.2   Ecuador – Update of list of quarantine pests  
3.6.  Ecuador informed the Committee that the Ecuadorian Agency for Agricultural Safety and 
Quality, AGROCALIDAD, had recently  published Resolution No. 0122 through which it updated the 
list of quarantine pests not present in Ecuador. The annex of the aforementioned resolution 
contained the details of all pests that were not present in Ecuadorian territory. Ecuador committed 
to making the updated list available to Members.  
3.2.3   South Africa – HPAI situation  
3.7.  South Africa provided an update on the highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N8) outbreak 
reported in chickens in South Africa on 22 June 2017, indicating that as of 18 October, 92 
locations had been identified as infected and reported to the OIE. South Africa informed Members 
of the measures that had been deployed to control the outbreak.  
3.3  March 2018 meeting (G/SPS/R/ 90) 
3.3.1   Thailand – Freedom from Xanthomonus Stewartii  or Pantoea Stewartii  
3.8.  Thailand reminded the Committee that it had been declared free from Xanthomonus Stewartii  
or Pantoea Stewartii  and that this information had been provided in document G/SPS/GEN/1352 G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 5 - 
 
  on 7 August 2014. In addition, Thailand had reported the absence  of Xanthomonus stewartii  to the 
IPPC on 3 September 2013. Thailand indicated that some trading partners still required it to follow 
certain import measures to eradicate this pest, although Thailand had confirmed that it did not 
exist in Thailand, based on  surveillance activities. Thailand requested Members to take this 
information into account.  
4  THEMATIC SESSIONS ON REGIONALIZATION  
4.1  July 2017 meeting (G/SPS/R/87)  
4.1.1   Report on the thematic session on regionalization  (animal diseases)  
4.1.  During the July 2017 SPS Com mittee meeting, the Chairperson reported that a thematic 
session on regionalization had been held on 11 July 2017 as agreed by the SPS Committee in 
March 2017, based on a proposal submitted by the European Union (G/SPS/W/293). The purpose 
of the thematic s ession had been to provide an opportunity for Members to increase their 
awareness of regionalization principles, and to learn from each other by sharing experiences about 
the challenges, as well as the benefits, of implementing regionalization in practice from the 
perspective of an importing, as well as an exporting party. This, in turn, would contribute to 
building confidence among trading partners when recognizing or seeking recognition of their 
regionalization measures. In particular, the thematic sessio n had focused on animal diseases.  
4.2.  The programme for the thematic session had been circulated in document G/SPS/GEN/1567. 
It had been prepared on the basis of contributions received from Members, and had been divided 
in three sessions.  
4.3.  In Session 1, the Secretariat had provided an overview of the provisions of the SPS 
Agreement on regionalization (Article 6) and relevant guidelines (G/SPS/48), as well as relevant 
jurisprudence from recent disputes. Dr Matthew Stone, Deputy -Director Gener al of the OIE, had 
provided an overview of the OIE standards on zoning and compartmentalization, and their 
implementation. In addition, he had also presented the implementation challenges and 
opportunities in applying the regionalization approach. Discussi ons had covered the use of the SPS 
Committee Guidelines in disputes, the differences in terminology related to regionalization, the use 
of special and differential treatment in recognizing free areas and the process for OIE recognition, 
among others.  
4.4.  In Se ssion 2, Members had shared their experiences on the practical implementation of 
regionalization from both an exporting perspective, as well as from an importing perspective. 
Presentations covered the use of regionalization in dealing with diseases such as  highly pathogenic 
avian influenza, BSE, classical swine fever, as well as more general experiences in applying the 
regionalization principle. Discussions had highlighted the importance of 'peace -time' agreements, 
building trust among trading partners and creating regional frameworks for cooperation. In 
addition, several common weaknesses had been identified in the recognition process from the 
importing Members' perspective, such as the submission of insufficient data by the exporting 
Member. In addition, t he OIE had underscored that reports of avian influenza outbreaks in wild 
birds should not change a country's disease status and, as such, should not result in trade 
restrictions.  
4.5.  In Session 3, Members had been provided with the opportunity to have general discussions 
on regionalization.  
4.6.  Concluding, the Chairperson had underscored that the thematic session had proven to be 
informative and interesting, and that it had provided a useful opportunity to increase Members' 
awareness of regionalization, from the pe rspective of existing international rules and guidelines, as 
well as its practical implementation by importing and exporting Members.  
4.7.  The Chairperson indicated that the presentations from the Thematic Session would be made 
available on the SPS Gateway page . 
4.8.  Finally, the Chairperson thanked the presenters for their insightful and interesting 
presentations. In particular, he expressed appreciation to the Deputy -Director General of the OIE G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 6 - 
 
  for participating in the thematic session. He also acknowledged the wil lingness of Members to 
share their experiences, as indicated by the number of speakers on the programme.  
4.9.  Chile thanked the European Union for their proposal to organize a thematic session on 
regionalization and suggested that another session on regionaliza tion should be organized with a 
specific focus on plant health.  
4.10.   The European Union appreciated how the session had developed, and stated that the 
suggestion by Chile should be reflected upon.  
4.11.   The United States expressed appreciation for the diversity of pe rspectives in the 
presentations in Session 2, in particular by Guatemala, Ukraine and South Africa. The United 
States suggested developing a deeper exchange with the OIE on a regular basis, as the OIE's 
information was so valuable.  
4.12.   Guatemala and Japan appr eciated the initiative by the European Union. Also, Guatemala 
supported Chile's proposal to hold a thematic session on regionalization and plant health.  
4.13.   The OIE recognised the high level of engagement by Members and the opportunity provided 
to learn about country perspectives. The OIE looked forward to a continued engagement.  
4.14.    The Chairperson indicated that although there already was a lengthy agenda for the 
October meeting, he and the Secretariat were always open to explore other issues, such as the 
propos al presented by Chile.  
4.2  November 2017 meeting (G/SPS/R/88)  
4.2.1   Committee work on regionalization  
4.15.   The United States thanked the European Union for proposing the thematic session on 
regionalization held on 11 July 2017, which had allowed the exchange of experienc es and best 
practices between a diverse set of Members, and further deepened the understanding of the SPS 
Agreement as it relates to regionalization. The United States encouraged Members to actively use 
the agenda on regionalization to share experiences on  challenges encountered and successes 
achieved in applying the principles of regionalization to facilitate safe trade. It further encouraged 
Members to strengthen the implementation of regionalization in a manner consistent with Article 6 
of the SPS Agreem ent. The United States proposed: (i) the upcoming Fifth Review of the SPS 
Agreement as a possible avenue to focus on regionalization; (ii) to further the discussion within 
the Committee by holding future thematic sessions or workshops to explore aspects of  
regionalization in greater detail, perhaps with a focus on developing guidance on best practices; 
(iii) a thematic session on pest -free areas in February 2018; and (iv) that Members report on 
cases where they had successfully applied the concept of region alization in resolving a specific 
trade concern. The United States concluded by calling on other Members to provide possible ideas 
on how to build on the discussion held in July 2017 on regionalization. The United States offered to 
present a short proposal  for the next thematic session on pest -free areas for Members' comments, 
if there was interest.  
4.16.   The European Union welcomed the United States proposal and highlighted the importance of 
continuous work on regionalization, possibly within the framework of th e Fifth Review. The 
European Union considered favourably the proposal to hold a thematic session on pest -free areas 
in February 2018. The European Union was also interested in observing cases where 
regionalization had been useful and where it had failed to  address trade concerns. With regards to 
the suggestion on guidance or best practices, the European Union pointed to the existing 
guidelines on the implementation of Article 6 and enquired about the added value in elaborating on 
this. Finally, the European  Union emphasised the contribution of the relevant international 
organizations, the OIE and IPPC, on this matter.  
4.17.   Chile reiterated its support for the US suggestions.  G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 7 - 
 
  4.3  March 2018 meeting (G/SPS/R/90)  
4.3.1   Report on the Thematic Session on Pest -Free Areas  
4.18.   The Cha irperson reported that a thematic session on pest -free areas had been held on 27 
February 2018 as agreed by the SPS Committee in November 2017, based on a proposal 
submitted by the United States (G/SPS/GEN/1593/Rev.1). The purpose of the thematic session 
had been to provide an opportunity for Members to increase their awareness of IPPC standards on 
pest-free areas, and to share experiences about the challenges, as well as the benefits, of 
implementing pest -free areas in practice from the perspective of an i mporting, as well as an 
exporting party. This, in turn, would contribute to building confidence among trading partners 
when recognizing or seeking recognition of pest -free areas. The programme for the thematic 
session had been circulated in document G/SPS/ GEN/1596/Rev.1, based on contributions received 
from Members.  
4.19.   In the Chairperson's introductory remarks, he had underscored the importance of thematic 
sessions for the work of the SPS Committee, in order to discuss particular SPS -related topics in an 
informal setting, and to hear the experiences of different Members in implementing specific 
provisions of the SPS Agreement.  
4.20.   In Session 1, the Secretariat had provided an overview of the provisions of the SPS 
Agreement on pest -free areas (Article 6) and the rel evant guidelines (G/SPS/48), as well as 
relevant jurisprudence from recent disputes. Although the existing body of relevant jurisprudence 
focused on disease -free areas in relation to animal health, the Secretariat had highlighted that the 
legal findings fr om these disputes could be broadly applicable to pest -free areas.  
4.21.   The Chairperson had also highlighted the important role played by the IPPC, as the 
standard -setting organization for plant health referenced in the SPS Agreement. Unfortunately, 
due to unfor eseen circumstances, the representative of the IPPC had not been able to attend the 
thematic session. However, arrangements had been made for a Member to present on IPPC's 
behalf, providing information on the IPPC standards on pest -free areas; factors to c onsider when 
establishing pest -free areas; implementation challenges; and information on the IPPC's Pest -Free 
Area Project.  
4.22.   The ensuing discussions in Session 1 had covered the role of dispute settlement panels in 
assessing the evidence provided by Members  in relation to the determination of pest -free areas 
and the broad nature of IPPC standards, among others.  
4.23.   In Part 1 of Session 2, speakers representing COSAVE and IAEA had shared their regional 
and international perspectives on the establishment of pest -free areas. At the regional level, the 
importance of defining and maintaining a pest -free area had been highlighted and the role of a 
regional plant protection organization (RPPO) in supporting the phytosanitary activities of its 
members. At the internation al level, the use of the sterile insect technique as a tool for 
establishing and maintaining pest -free areas had been explained, as well as the associated 
benefits and challenges of this approach.  
4.24.   In Part 2 of Session 2, Members had shared their practical experiences on the establishment 
and maintenance of pest -free areas, as well as the legislative aspects and more general principles 
related to their implementation. Presentations had covered the use of pest -free areas in dealing 
with pests such as the Medi terranean fruit fly, oriental fruit fly, guava fruit fly and the red 
imported fire ant in different regions of the world. In addition to the speakers indicated on the 
programme, a couple of Members had taken the floor to share experiences in recognizing pe st-free 
areas of their trading partners. The discussions had highlighted the importance of the early 
detection of pests, the availability of a corrective action plan to deal with outbreaks, and building 
trust among trading partners.  
4.25.   In concluding, the Chai rperson had remarked that the thematic session had proven to be 
informative and interesting, and that it had provided a useful opportunity to increase Members' 
awareness of pest -free areas, from the perspective of international rules and guidelines, as wel l as 
their practical implementation by Members. The presentations from the Thematic Session would be 
made available on the SPS Gateway page. Finally, the Chairperson had thanked the presenters for G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 8 - 
 
  their insightful and interesting presentations. The Chairpe rson had also acknowledged the 
willingness of Members to share their experiences.  
4.26.   The IPPC expressed regret for its unavoidable absence at the Thematic Session on Pest -Free 
Areas, due to weather -related travel delays. The IPPC conveyed its appreciation to the delegate 
from the United Kingdom for stepping in at the last minute to deliver the IPPC presentation. The 
IPPC also indicated its willingness to contribute to follow -up actions, if any, from the thematic 
session.  
5  NOTIFICATIONS RELATE D TO ARTICLE 6  
5.1.  From April 201 7 through March 2018 , 93 notifications ( 28 regular and 65 emergency) related 
to Article 6. Five of those notifications (all regular) indicated that the notified measure was trade 
facilitating; these notifications mainly inform of measures that wi ll simplify the requirements for 
the import of products originating from certain regions, as well as the recognition of pest -free or 
disease -free areas.  
Table 4.1: Trade Facilitating Notifications Related to Article 6  
Document 
symbol  Notifying 
Member  Description of content  
G/SPS/N/ARG/211  Argentina  The notified text establishes the phytosanitary requirements 
governing the importation into Argentina of sugar cane 
cuttings/slips on the basis of a pest risk analysis (PRA).3 
G/SPS/N/ARG/212  Argentina  The notified text establishes the phytosanitary requirements 
governing the importation of strawberry plants, established on 
the basis of a pest risk analysis.4 
G/SPS/N/MEX/328  Mexico  Pursuant to the Decision establishing the module of 
phytosanitary requirements for the importation of goods 
regulated by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural 
Development, Fisheries and Food, in relation to plant health 
(Acuerdo por el que se establece el módulo de requisitos 
fitosanitarios para la importación de  mercancías reguladas por 
la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca 
y Alimentación, en materia de sanidad vegetal ), published in 
the Mexican Official Journal on 7 February 2012, the current 
phytosanitary requirements for the importat ion into Mexico of 
Brussels sprout ( Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera ) seeds 
originating in and coming from France have been amended on 
the basis of an update to the phytosanitary requirements and a 
pest risk re -assessment.  
G/SPS/N/MEX/330  Mexico  Pursuant to the Decision establishing the module of 
phytosanitary requirements for the importation of goods 
regulated by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural 
Development, Fisheries and Food, in relation to plant health 
(Acuerdo por el que se establece el m ódulo de requisitos 
fitosanitarios para la importación de mercancías reguladas por 
la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca 
y Alimentación, en materia de sanidad vegetal ), published in 
the Mexican Official Journal on 7 February 2012 , the 
phytosanitary requirements for the importation into Mexico of 
asparagus ( Asparagus officinalis ) seeds originating in and 
coming from the Netherlands have been established on the 
basis of a pest risk analysis.  
G/SPS/N/RUS/146  Russian 
Federation  This letter abolishes  a number of letters of Rosselkhoznadzor 
imposing restrictions on imports of live pigs, pork and pork 
products from Lithuania, Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Czech 
Republic and Romania due to ASF outbreaks. In particular, 
letters notified by G/SP S/N/RUS/48 dated 10 February 2014, 
                                                
3 In the notification, France  is indicated as the specific region/ country likely to be affected.    
4 In the notification, Spain is indicated as the specific region/ country likely to be affected.    G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 9 - 
 
  Document 
symbol  Notifying 
Member  Description of content  
G/SPS/N/RUS/49 dated 4  March 2014, G/SPS/N/RUS/64 dated 
16 July 2014, G/SPS/N/RUS/76 dated 16  September 2014, 
G/SPS/N/RUS/142 dated 24 July 2017, G/SPS/N/RUS/143 
dated 4  August 2017, are abolished. In accordance with this  
letter , import of live pigs, pork meat and raw meat 
preparations from the entire territory of the European Union to 
the territory of the Russian Federation, excluding the territory 
of Sardinia and certain other administrative territories of the 
EU member States, is allowed. The list of administrative 
territories is set out in the Annex to the veterinary certificate. 
Moreover, in accordance with this letter, import of heat -treated 
pork products from the territories affected by ASF is allowed 
only on conditi on of heat -treatment in accordance with Chapter 
15.1 of the OIE Code. Transit restrictions for goods from ASF 
affected territories persist.  
 
6  SPECIFIC TRADE CONCE RNS AND REGIONALIZAT ION 
6.1.  Specific trade concerns ( STCs) can be raised due to issues pertaining to regionalization. From 
April 201 7 through March 201 8, one STC  that related to regionalization was raised  for the first 
time. 
Table 5.1: New STCs Related to Regionalization (April 201 7–March 201 8) 
STC No  Title Member raising 
the concern  Member 
maintaining  
the measure  Date first 
raised  
431 South Africa's import restrictions 
on poultry due to Highly 
Pathogenic Avian Influenza  European Union  South Africa  02/11/2017  
6.2.  For the same period, four previously raised STCs  that related to regionalization were brought 
again to the attention of the Committee.  
Table 5.2: Previously Raised STC's Related to Regionalization (April 201 7–March 2018 ) 
STC No  Title Member raising 
the concern  Member 
maintaining  
the measure  Date first 
raised  
271 Restrictions on imports of swine 
meat Brazil  Mexico  24/06/2008  
392 China's import restrictions due to 
African swine fever  European Union  China  15/07/2015  
393 Korea's import restrictions due to 
African swine fever  European Union   Korea, Republic 
of  15/07/2015  
406 China's import restrictions due to 
Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza  European Union, 
United States of 
America  China  16/03/2016  
6.3.  In addition, panel proceedings in the context of the WTO dispute settlement resolution 
procedures continued with respect to two previously raised STCs:  
 India's restrictions due to avian influenza (STC 185 raised by the United States, March 
2004). At its m eeting on 19 June 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and 
the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report (DS430). Thereafter, on 19 
April 2016, the matter was referred to arbitration under Article 22.6 of the DSU. The 
arbitration pa nel was composed with the original panelists. On 6 April 2017, India 
requested the establishment of a compliance panel  (Article 21.5) . At its meeting on 19 
April 2017, the DSB deferred the establishment of a compliance panel. At its meeting on 
22 May 2017,  the DSB agreed, pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer to the original 
panel, if possible.  The arbitration and compliance proceedings are currently ongoing.  G/SPS/GEN/1618  
 
- 10 - 
 
   
 Russia's measures on live pigs and pork products due to African swine fever (STC 369 
raised by the European Union, March 2013). At its meeting on 21 March 2017, the DSB 
adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report (DS475), as modified by the 
Appellate Body report.  Thereafter, on 3 January 2018, the matter was referred to 
arbitration u nder Article 22.6 of the DSU. O n 25 January 2018, the Russian Federation 
requested consultations under Article 21.5 (com pliance proceedings) of the DSU, and on 2 
February 2018, the European Union also requested consultations under Article 21.5 of the 
DSU. 
__________