WT/DS484/1, G/L/1075  
G/SPS/GEN/1371, G/LIC/D/49  
G/TBT/D/47, G/AG/GEN/120, G/PSI/D/5  
 
23 October 2014  
(14-6138)  Page: 1/3  
  Original: English  
 
 INDONESIA – MEASURES CONCERNING TH E IMPORTATION OF CHICKEN MEAT  
AND CHICKEN PRODUCTS 
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY BRAZIL 
The following communication, dated 16 October 201 4, from the delegation of Brazil to the 
delegation of Indonesia and to the Chairperson of  the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in 
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.  
_______________ 
  
My authorities have instructed me to request cons ultations with the Government of the Republic of 
Indonesia ("Indonesia") pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
1994 ("GATT 1994"), Article 11 of the  Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures ("SPS Agreement"), Article 6 of the Agr eement on Import Licensing Procedures ("Import 
Licensing Agreement"), Article 14 of the  Agr eement on Technical Barriers to Trade ("TBT 
Agreement"), Article 19 of the Agreement on Agricu lture ("Agriculture Agreement") and Article 8 of 
the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection concerning certain measures imposed by Indonesia on 
the importation of meat from fowls of the species Gallus domesticus and products from fowls of the species Gallus domesticus hereinafter referre d to as chicken meat and chicken products.  
For the last five years, Brazil has endeavored to gain access to the Indonesian poultry market, 
particularly to the market of chicken meat and of chicken products. In spite of Brazil's best efforts, Indonesia has adopted and maintained restrictive rules and procedures which effectively prohibit 
Brazilian chicken meat and chicken products to enter the Indonesian market.  
In 2009, Brazil sent its health certificate proposal for poultry meat to the Indonesian Government. 
One year later, a specific proposal was sent regarding turkey and duck meat. None of the proposals have been approved so far by the Indonesian authorities, despite the fact that the 
Brazilian authorities have promptly provided all of the requested information, as well as additional 
information supplied at Brazil's own initiative. Indonesia has not taken any effective steps to approve the certificate nor has it presented a ri sk assessment indicating the existence of any 
scientific reasons for not approving it. Instead, In donesia seems to condition the approval of the 
health certificate on matters unrelated to sanitary issues and lacking scientific basis.  
The non-approval of the health certificate is not the only measure of concern.  Brazil has reasons 
to believe its chicken meat and its chicken products would still meet significant barriers of entry 
after the granting of the health certificate. 
Indonesia's sanitary regulation (Regulation 84/2013) contains a positive list of animal products 
that may be imported into its territory, which is mirrored in its import licensing regulation 
(46/2013). In both lists, the Harmonized System codes for fresh and frozen uncut chicken meat 
are described as being duck meat. It is thus uncertain whether chicken meat is allowed to be imported at all. Furthermore, Indonesia does not seem to allow for the importation of cut chicken 
meat, whether frozen or fresh. 
Brazil has also reasons to believe that certain Indonesian measures, particularly regarding shipping 
and quarantine on the importation of chicken meat and chicken products, are unnecessarily WT/DS484/1 • G/L/1075 • G/SPS/GEN/1371 • G/LIC/D/49 • G/TBT/D/47 • G/AG/GEN/120 • 
G/PSI/D/5 
 
- 2 - 
 
  constraining and discriminatory against its exports, and, moreover, are not based on the relevant 
international standards, guidelines or recommendations. There also appears to be a series of other 
regulations which seem to further constrain Brazilian exports of chicken meat and chicken products. 
Should it be allowed, the importation of chicken meat and of chicken products from Brazil would 
still be subject to the approval by multiple agencies and acquisition of multiple licenses in a complex and opaque system. Indonesia also imposes a non-automatic import licensing regime to 
chicken meat and chicken products which seems to unjustifiably restrict trade, for it has put in 
place and administers its non-automatic licensing regime in an inconsistent and unpredictable manner which seems to unduly burden and restrict the access of imports. 
Importers must obtain an Importer Identity Number (Angka Pengenal Importir or "API"), from the 
Ministry of Trade, issued at the discretion of the Mi nister of Trade. They must also register at the 
Directorate General of Customs and Excise, within the Ministry of Finance. Importers of chicken meat and chicken products must then obtain the accreditation as a registered importer of "certain 
products" by Indonesia's Minister of Trade ("Registered Importer of Certain Products"). These 
licenses have strict deadlines and have very short terms and may restrict the ports of entry of the imports. 
Chicken meat imports and chicken product imports all require a prior recommendation from the 
Minister of Agriculture, which apparently has the discretion to restrict the quantity, the destinations and/or the uses of those products. This request also has strict deadlines and short terms and does not seem to be administered in a transparent manner. 
Furthermore, Indonesia seems to impose pre-ship ment inspection requirements, which may cause 
unreasonable delays and be applied in a discriminatory manner.  
Finally, Indonesia's legislation authorizes the adoption of measures relating to price policy and 
management of imports which may impose restrictions in order to manage the internal supply of 
"strategic goods", a concept in which chicken meat and chicken products are inserted.  
The legal instruments through which Indonesia imposes and administers these measures in a 
manner that affects Brazil's rights under the WTO include, but are not limited to, the following 
instruments, as well as the regulations and complementary provisions and/or amendments: 
• Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 7 of Year 2014 Concerning Trade ("Trade Law"); 
• Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 18 of 2009 on Husbandry and Animal Health; 
• Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture No. 84/Permentan/PD.410/8/2013 on Importation 
of Carcass, Meat, Offal, and/or Processed Products thereof into Indonesian Territory, as amended by Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture No. 96/Permentan/PD.410/9/2013 and 
Regulation of the Minister of Agricult ure No. 110/Permentan/OT.410/9/2014 ("MoA 
Regulation 84/2013");  
• Regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 46/M- DAG/PER/8/2013 on Provisions of Import and 
Export of Animal and Animal Product  as amende d by Regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 
57/M-DAG/PER/9/2013 and by Regulation of the Minister of Trade 17/M-DAG/PER/3/2014 
("MoT Regulation 46/2013");  
• Regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 83/M- DAG/PER/12/2012 on Provisions of Import of 
Certain Products as amended by Minister of Trade Regulation No. 61/M-DAG/PER/9/2013 
("MoT Regulation 83/2012");  
• Regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 27/ M-DAG/PER/5/2012 on Provisions of Importer 
Identity Number, as amended by Minister of  Trade Regulation No. 59/M-DAG/PER/9/2012 
and Minister of Trade Regulation No. 84/M-D AG/PER/12/2012 ("MoT Regulation 27/2012");  WT/DS484/1 • G/L/1075 • G/SPS/GEN/1371 • G/LIC/D/49 • G/TBT/D/47 • G/AG/GEN/120 • 
G/PSI/D/5 
 
- 3 - 
 
  • Regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 54/ M-DAG/PER/10/2009 on General Provisions on 
Import ("MoT Regulation 54/2009");  
• Decree of the Minister of Finance No. 454/KMK. 04/2002 on Registration of Importer ("MoF 
Decree 454/2002"). 
In Brazil's views, these measures appear to be inconsistent with Indonesia's obligations under the 
following provisions of the covered agreements: 
(i) Article 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8 and Annex C of the SPS Agreement; 
(ii) Articles 2.1, 2.2, 2.4,  5.1 and 5.2, of the TBT Agreement;  
(iii) Articles 4.2 and 14 of the Agreement of Agriculture; (iv) Articles 1.3, 3.2 and 3.3 of the Ag reement on Import Licensing Procedures; 
(v) Articles 2.1 and 2.15 of the Ag reement on Preshipment Inspection. 
(vi) Articles III:4, X:1, X:3 and XI:1 of the GATT 1994. 
Brazil reserves the right to raise further factual and legal claims in the course of the consultations. 
Particularly, Brazil has taken notice that the Indonesian parliament approved, on 14 October 2014, 
an amendment to Law No. 18 of 2009 on Husbandr y and Animal Health, which has not yet come 
into force. Brazil specifically reserves the ri ght to address these legislative changes in the 
consultations and in further proceedings relating to the matter at issue. 
We look forward to receiving your reply to the present request and to fixing a mutually convenient 
date for consultations. 
 
__________