The first is the existence of severe distortions in the form of tariff and non-tariff barriers surrounding various markets in the different regions of the world. In the extreme case, an efficient sugar industry may end up being driven out of production by an inefficient one which happens to be either well protected or well supported by its government. The second reason is that sugar is a political commodity. At a basic level, people need something sweet. Otherwise there would be a lot to grumble about, possibly leading to political instability.
Sugar is naturally sweet and keeps the people less agitated.
The third reason is that all the sugar industries in SADC play crucial strategic and multifunctional roles in their respective economies. For instance, they promote economic growth through contributions to national output, foreign exchange earnings and government revenues out of which social services are provided. The basic argument is that in a world full of distortions, regional welfare can be enhanced if a new distortion is introduced. The special rules are in essence the new distortion. In the long run, the best scenario is one where all distortions have been removed, trade is free and based on comparative advantage.