2.

Article 13 (1) of the said Regulation No 1371/71 of the Commission states that the “subsequent verifications” of the certificates of origin for which it provides “shall be carried out at random or whenever the competent customs authorities in the Community have reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the document or the accuracy of the information regarding the true origin of the goods in question or their components”. Article 13 (2) states that for the purpose of implementing the provisions of paragraph (1) “the competent customs authorities in the Community shall return the certificate ... to the customs authorities of the exporting State, giving, where appropriate, the reasons of form or substance for an inquiry”. The second subparagraph thereof adds that “if the competent customs authorities in the Community decide to suspend application of the provisions relating, to tariff preferences referred to in Article 1 while awaiting the results of the verification, they shall offer to release the goods to the importer subject to any precautionary measures judged necessary”. Ciro Acampora claims to see in that last rule the statement of a principle corresponding to that accepted in Italian law to the effect that when the customs authorities wish to challenge the declaration of the importer and to arrange verification of the origin of the goods they must suspend the importation or at the very least allow it only after taking the necessary precautions. To be able to maintain that argument Ciro Acampora understands the words “subsequent verification” in Article 13 (1) to mean verification subsequent to the issue of the certificate of origin and not subsequent to customs clearance; the verification must be made “while the goods are still at the disposal of the customs” and thus before the importer has been given preferential tariff treatment. There is no support for that interpretation in the wording of the provision in question; it contradicts the sense and is out of keeping with the context of Article 13 and indeed the system of Regulation No 1371/71. From a logical point of view, I would say that if the undertaking's contention were accepted the word “subsequent” would be quite superfluous : verification of certificates can take place only when they have been issued and produced! When the draftsman of the regulation stipulated that the verification was “subsequent”, that stipulation cannot be understood as confirmation of what is obvious, namely that verification comes after the issue of the certificate. As regards the context of Article 13 it must be pointed out that the second subparagraph of Article 13 (2), on which Ciro Acampora relies as supporting its point of view, simply states a hypothesis, that in which the customs authorities decide to suspend application of the provisions on tariff preference while awaiting the results qf the verification of the certificate. The hypothetical nature of that subparagraph clearly shows that the alternative remains open; the customs authorities need not suspend the grant of the tariff preference while awaiting the results of the verification (in other words, the fact that the result is not yet known or simply that it is uncertain whether there will be verification does not prevent customs clearance). A reading of Article 6 is sufficient to show that the latter is the normal case; Article 6 lays down that originating products within the meaning of the regulation “shall enjoy the benefit of the provisions on tariff preferences in the Community” on simple production of a certificate of origin signed by the authorities in the exporting country. The same article adds: “subject to the latter country's assisting the Community, through the customs authorities of the Member States, in verifying the authenticity and regularity of the certificates”. The normal system is thus clear: the goods are imported and given customs clearance on the basis of the certificate accompanying them and enjoy the preferential tariff system laid down by the regulation: verification of the certificate may if necessary be arranged and made later (“subsequently”), that is after customs clearance. The provision in the last subparagraph of Article 13 is an exception to that system. On what basis may the subsequent verification take place? It is stated in Article 13 (1): at random or whenever the customs authorities “have reasonable doubt” as to the authenticity of the document or the accuracy of the information therein. It must be pointed out that in both cases the verification is “subsequent”; it is thus to be assumed that in both cases preferential tariff treatment has been granted to the importer pursuant to the aforesaid Article 6. It seems reasonable to suppose that the exceptional case in which the grant of preferential tariff treatment is suspended (the last subparagraph of Article 13 (2)) is intended to cover the position where not only is there doubt about the authenticity and accuracy of the certificate but such doubt existed when the certificate was produced to the customs authorities. On the other hand there would be no justification for derogating from the principle of Article 6 simply where there is random verification. It may thus be said that the very concept of sampling, which by its nature is random and intermittent, presupposes that tariff preference is granted to all importers who produce a certificate of origin subject to “subsequent” verification: it would otherwise be quite arbitrary to hold up certain goods pending the results of verification and give customs clearance to others simply on the basis of random verification and certificates which give rise to no particular doubts.