. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/W/177 
28 June 2005 
 (05-2757) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
  
 
IMPROVING THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE AGREEMENT  
ON SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES 
 
Communication from Brazil
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 23 June 2005,  is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Brazil.  
_______________ 
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. Considering the efforts made by the OIE and IPPC in reporting experiences and developing 
specific guidelines related to the issue of Regionaliza tion, and taking into account the effort made by 
several delegations in the SPS Committee meetings in  order to clarify their needs and understandings 
on the matter, Brazil wishes to present some comm ents and make its contribution to this highly 
relevant discussion. 
2. Brazil considers of great importance the effort s by international standard-setting bodies and 
the SPS Committee in trying to clarify and avoid duplication of work.  No less importance should be given to the contribution by Members that reported their experiences and showed their willingness to 
make the SPS Agreement effectively applicable. 
II. COMMENTS 
3. Despite the work undertaken by the OIE and IPPC  towards clearer and more effective ways of 
applying Article 6, we strongly believe  that there ar e specific and differentiated roles to be played by 
the SPS Committee and the international st andard-setting bodies in this field. 
4. According to this understanding, we believe th at the international standard-setting bodies are 
the appropriate fora for technical/scientific work  regarding the process of recognition of pest- or 
disease-free areas or areas of low pest or disease prevalence and that non-technical/scientific 
procedures should have guidelines defined by the SPS Committee. 
5. As our experience in the process of recognition of pest- or disease-free areas or areas of low 
pest or disease prevalence indicates, in some cases th e difficulties in the implementation of Article 6 
of the SPS Agreement are not related to th e lack of technical/scientific guidelines and 
recommendations or the capability of the exporting country to implement them accordingly.  Lengthy regulatory and administrative processes are in some  cases the real difficulty faced by the exporting 
countries when seeking recognition for their regionali zation measures.  With a view to address these 
concerns, we have identified the need for th e SPS Committee to discu ss and develop general 
guidelines to be followed by importing and exporting Members during the process. G/SPS/W/177 
Page 2  
 
  
6. We also believe that objections to the recogn ition of pest- or disease-free status by importing 
Members should relate exclusively to the protection of  human, animal or plant life or health.  In this 
regard assessment of economic impact for the pur poses of regionalization should be part of risk 
analysis relating to the impact of the pest or disease  of concern and should not be carried out for the 
reason of assessing the impact of trade liberalization on internal markets. 
7. Brazil suggests that to avoid undue delays, ther e should be a single administrative procedure 
which takes into account previously submitted r ecognized pest- or disease-free areas when updating a 
risk analysis for the national territory of a Member. 
8. Brazil would also like to have reflected in th e general guidelines  the understanding that after 
the recognition of full compliance by the exporting country with the guidelines for the process of 
declaring pest- disease-free status of the international standard-setting bodies, the 
administrative/regulatory process be expeditious, wit hout requests for more technical/scientific data 
unless reasonably justified. 
9. Brazil considers that administrative procedures concerning the recognition of pest- or disease-
free areas and areas of low pest or disease prevalence should fulfill transparent steps mutually agreed 
between importing and exporting Members, preferentia lly with agreed timeframes in order to avoid 
undue delays. 
III. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 6 
10. Once again affirming the importance of the recognition of pest- or disease-free areas and 
areas of low pest/disease prevalence in order to improve the implementation of Article 6 and 
consequently to foster international trade rela tions and economic devel opment, and taking into 
account the discussions on this issue, Brazil proposes the following: 
(a) That the SPS Committee continue the discussions on the implementation of Article 6 
with a view to develop general guidelines to serve as a reference in the bilateral 
process for the recognition of regionalization.   To be effective, those guidelines 
should address the following issues: 
(i) The distinction between administrative/regulatory and technical/scientific 
aspects of the process with a view to avoid duplication of work; 
(ii) Measures to be taken in the admini strative/regulatory field, including 
possible timeframes, in order to avoid undue delays;  and 
(iii) The consideration of international guidelines, recommendations, procedures, 
and decisions as a basis for evaluating a Member’s request for 
regionalization. 
(b) That the international standard-setting bodi es (the OIE and IPPC) continue to provide 
information on the progress of their work w ith respect to the application of the 
principle of regionalization.  
 
__________