G/TBT/W/565  
 
29 November 2018  
(18-7544) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
 
EUROPEAN UNION — AMENDMENTS TO THE DIREC TIVE 2009/28/EC,  
RENEWABLE ENERGY DIR ECTIVE  
STATEMENT BY INDONESIA  TO THE COMMITTEE ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS T O TRADE  
14 AND 15  NOVEMBER  2018 
The following communication, dated 22 November 2018 , is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Indonesia . 
 
_______________  
1.  The Government of Indonesia would like to further seek clarification regarding the European 
Union proposal on the amendment of the Directive on Renewable Energy, referred  to as RED II, 
which has been agreed by the European Parliament, the European Council, and the European 
Commission in a trialogue on 13 June 2018. In particular:  
2.  With regard to the early texts of RED II that referred to a ban and/or phase out of palm oil w ithin 
the mandated biofuel mix by 2030, could the EU unequivocally confirm that there is no ban or phase 
out of palm oil?  
3.  The earlier clarification stressed that the agreement reached includes a gradual reduction of the 
amount of certain categories of biof uels counted towards EU 's renewable energy target. We would 
like the EU to clarify:  
a. The time line for gradual reductions?  
b. Whether the time line will vary according to the different categories of biofuels?  
c. What categories of biofuels does the EU have in min d? 
4.  Although the EU has explained that a gradual phasing out of  palm oil within biofuel targets would 
not affect palm oil exports, it would certainly have a significant and adverse impact on palm oil 
exports to the EU energy sector.  Does the EU agree with t his, bearing in mind recent increase in 
palm oil exports to the EU energy sector?  
5.  Bearing in mind the political statement that have been issued by, amongst others, EU Institutions 
and members states, can the EU unequivocally state that RED II will not be u sed to discriminate 
against palm oil to the advantage of EU home produced vegetable oils, especially rapeseed, at EU, 
member states and regional level?  
6.  With regard to certain member states applying pressure on HVO producers to stop importing 
palm oil and i nstead use rapeseed, could the EU explain any measures that may have been taken to 
ensure that the trade in palm oil is not disrupted at member state and regional EU level?  
7.  If no actions are taken by the EU to counter trade restrictive actions at member state or regional 
level, does the EU acknowledge the right of Indonesian Regions to likewise encourage "voluntary 
bans" on imports of, for example, wines from Europe to Bali?  G/TBT/W/565  
 
- 2 - 
 
  8.  Does the EU accept that the singling out of palm oil is intended to have a trade freezing impact 
on the trade between developing and developed countries, especially on palm oil, that has a very 
significant comparative advantage over home produced vegetable  oils? 
9.  As the European Commission is mandated to undertake an ILUC study, how does the EU intend 
to ensure a "weighting " of the ILUC in a developed country with, for example, palm oil in  developing 
countries?  
10.  Bearing in mind that only 4% of the global land  bank available for food production is devoted 
to biofuel, does the EU believe that any policies based on the ILUC studies is proportionate to the 
purported environmental objectives to be achieved?  
11.  Reiterating the Joint Letter of the seven representatives of the Palm Oil Producing Countries in 
Brussels, 5 November 2018, the existing methodologies for the ILUC are imprecise and a number of 
studies have rendered different results across the vegetable oil sector. It is also to be noted that 
ILUC is not an inte rnationally accepted benchmark but has been used for policy guidance within, 
amongst others, the EU.  Does the EU accept this?  
12.  Indonesia firmly believes that any weighting  should take account of the  overall objectives  of the 
SDGs by 2030  and the commitment of UN Members toward achieving these goals, in both developed 
and developing countries, with no distinction between different vegetable oils. Indonesia seeks the 
EU's view on this and its commitment to the SDGs, and how, if at all,  will the ILUC study be a dapted 
to the SDGs?  
13.  With regard to the narrative on vegetable oils in the EU, which is largely focused on singling out 
palm oil on the level of deforestation, does the EU accept that the the singling out of palm oil would 
create an unnecessary obstacle to trade and as such would be contrary  to Article 2.2 of the TBT 
Agreement?  
14.  Does the EU recognise the importance of addressing environmental concerns at the level of 
vegetable oils in general to include, for example, contamination of soils and oceans from  nitrates in 
both developed and developing countries?  
15.  Does the EU recognise that targeting the vegetable oils produced outside of the EU on narrow, 
selective environmental grounds moulded to exclude oils produced in the EU, would be regarded as 
a discriminatio n and would violate Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement.  
16.  We look forward to a response from the EU on all of these concerns . 
__________