PANAMA – MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM COSTA RICA REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY COSTA RICA
Document: REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY
Date: 14 January 2021
Document codes: WT/DS599/1; G/AG/GEN/179; G/SPS/GEN/1873; G/L/1383
Complainant: Costa Rica
Respondent: Panama
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Guatemala, India, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Russia, Taiwan, U.S., United Kingdom
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2,   AgricultureArt. I:1, X:3(a), XI:1  GATT 1994Art. 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 6.1, 7, 8, Annex B para. 1, Annex C, Annex C para. 1(a), Annex C para. 1(b),   Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

PANAMA – MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION
OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM COSTA RICA
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY COSTA RICA
The following communication, dated 1 1 January 2021, from the delegation of Costa Rica to the
delegation of Panama, is circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with Article 4.4 of
the DSU.

My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with Panama pursuant to Articles 1 and 4
of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU),
Article 19 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Article 11 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary
and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), and Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), with respect to measures taken by Panama that restrict or prohibit
the importation of various products originating in Costa Rica, including : (i) strawberries; (ii) milk
products; beef; pork; processed poultry meat; cured beef, pork and poultry products (including ham,
sausages, mortadella, bacon, chorizo made of pork, chicken and turkey , pâté, pepperoni, salami,
legs, ribs, loin of pork , roast beef and beef loin); prepared beef, pork and chicken, chicken and
turkey breast , pork rind and dry chorizo ; and fish food ; (iii) pineapples; and (iv) plantains and
bananas.

I. Measures at issue
The measures covered by this request for cons ultations include, but are not limited to, those
described below.
(a) Measures restricting or prohibiting imports of strawberries originating in Costa Rica
On 20 February 2020, through communication AUPSA-AG-051-2020, and without prior notice,
Panama took the decision to ban imports of strawberries from Costa Rica due to the alleged detection
of oxamyl residues in shipments of Costa Rican strawberries - sent in February 2020 - that exceeded
Panama's maximum levels for this substance, established in Executive Decree No. 467 of
7 November 2007.
According to the above -mentioned communication from Panama, the ban on these imports will be
maintained until the phytosanitary authority of Costa Rica indicates that it has taken corrective
measures.
In this respect, Costa Rica provided Panama with relevant information on this matter through a
number of communications, including official letters DSFE-0343-2020 of 5 May 2020 and
DSFE-0525-2020 of 12 June 2020. Nevertheless, despite there being no evidence of the use or
presence of oxamyl in the production of strawberries in Costa Rica, Panama has maintained the ban
on imports of this Costa Rican product, causing the market to close down completely.
WT/DS599/1 • G/AG/GEN/179 • G/SPS/GEN/1873 • G/L/1383

(b) Measures restricting or prohibiting imports of milk products ; beef; pork; processed poultry
meat; cured beef, pork and poultry products (including ham, sausages, mortadella, bacon,
chorizo made of pork, chicken and turkey, pâté, pepperoni, salami, legs, ribs, loin of pork,
roast beef and beef loin); prepared beef, pork and chicken, chicken and turkey breast, pork
rind and dry chorizo; and fish food originating in Costa Rica
Panama decided, without any prior notice, not to renew the sanitary approval that allowed various
Costa Rican plants to export to Panama milk products ; beef; pork; processed poultry meat; cured
beef, pork and poultry products (including ham, sausages, mortadella, bacon, chorizo made of pork,
chicken and turkey, pâté, pepperoni, salami, legs, ribs, loin of pork, roast beef and beef loin);
prepared beef, pork and chicken, chicken and turkey breast, pork rind and dry chorizo; and fish
food, which expired on 30 June 2020. Panama took this step even though the affected Costa Rican
establishments had requested the renewal of their respective sanitary approvals sufficiently in
advance. Unlike the practice previously applied to Costa Rican establishments and that applied to
other countries, the Panamanian authority refused to extend the validity of the approvals, thereby
preventing the export of these products to Panama.
In communication AUPSA-AG-229-2020 of 10 July 2020, Panama stated that instead of renewing
the previous approvals, it was, in this case, necessary to conduct a new evaluation and approval
procedure "from scratch", which involved re-recognition of the Costa Rican sanitary system, and
new on-site sanitary inspections and audits.
In note DG-1420-2020 of 24 November 2020 sent to AUPSA, Costa Rica stated that it was not
appropriate to start the process "from scratch", taking into account the relevant international
standards and applicable Central American regulations. In that note, the Director -General of the
National Animal Health Service of Costa Rica (SENASA) therefore requested that exports resume.
Costa Rica has not, however, received any reply from the Panamanian health authorities in this
respect.
Despite Costa Rica's long history of exporting milk products; beef; pork; processed poultry meat;
cured beef, pork and poultry products; prepared beef, pork , chicken and turkey; and fish food to
Panama, and Costa Rica's sanitary status not having changed in the slightest, Panama decided to
maintain an import ban on these Costa Rican products without giving any prior notice, and to date
has not taken any steps to allow for the resumption of trade in these products.
(c) Measures restricting or prohibiting imports of fresh pineapple originating in Costa Rica
On 20 January 2019, through communication AUPSA/AG-032-2019, and without giving prior notice,
Panama took the decision to ban imports of fresh pineapple from Costa Rica, which were previously
permitted in line with the requirements established by Panama in Decision AUPSA-DINAN-116-2008.
Panama stated that the import ban was due to the alleged detection of the pink hibiscus mealybug
pest (Maconellicoccus hirsutus).
According to the above-mentioned communication from Panama, the import ban will be maintained
until Costa Rica indicates and provides information on its current phytosanitary status in pineapple
production areas, in relation to the pink hibiscus mealybug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus) and other
pests.
Costa Rica ha s explained to Panama in various communications, including official letters
DSFE-083-2019 of 6 February 2019 and DSFE-0849-2019 of 10 October 2019, that its phytosanitary
status has not at all changed, and that it has had no reports of the pest concerned being detected
in pineapple shipments from Costa Rica to Panama.
Despite this, Panama has not taken any action in response to the information provided by Costa Rica,
and is maintaining the ban on the importation into Panamanian territory of Costa Rican pineapple,
thereby preventing trade in this product.
WT/DS599/1 • G/AG/GEN/179 • G/SPS/GEN/1873 • G/L/1383

(d) Measures restricting or prohibiting the importation of plantains and bananas originating in
Costa Rica
Panama prohibited imports of plantains and bananas from Costa Rica, without prior notice, through
communications AUPSA-AG-392-2019, received on 24 October 2019, and AUPSA-AG-424-2019, of
25 October 2019, respectively. In these communications, Panama stated that the importation of
these products would remain prohibited until it had completed a technical review of the existing
phytosanitary requirements.
Subsequently, in communication DM-N-1352-2019 of 18 December 2019, Panama changed the
reason for prohibiting imports of plantains and bananas from Costa Rica, stating that the ban was
due to the declaration of a national state of alert on account of the risk of introduction of the "fungus
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense tropical race 4 affecting musaceae". Panama stated that the
adoption of new requirements for imports of plantains and bananas from Costa Rica would require
a new risk analysis, which, in turn, would require verification visits to Costa Rica.
Despite the fact that the pest concerned is absent from Costa Rican territory and that Costa Rica's
phytosanitary status remains unchanged in this respect, Costa Rica has expressed its willingness to
let Panama carry out verification visits. Nevertheless, Panama h as refused to proceed with these
visits or to take any other steps to enable trade in plantains and bananas to resume and maintains
a ban on the importation into Panamanian territory of plantains and bananas from Costa Rica.

This request for consultations covers, in addition to the above -mentioned measures, any other
measure that prolongs, replaces, amends, implements, extends or applies, or otherwise maintains,
the conduct described above.
II. Legal basis for the complaints
Each and every one of the measures described in Section I of this request for consultations appears
to be inconsistent with each and every one of the following obligations assumed by Panama under
the WTO covered agreements:
• Article 2.1 of the SPS Agreement, given that the measures do not appear to have been
developed or applied in accordance with the provisions of the SPS Agreement.

• Article 2.2 of the SPS Agreement, because the measures do not appear to be applied only
to the extent necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health, or to be based on
technical and/or scientific principles.

• Articles 2.3 and 5.5 of the SPS Agreement, given that the measures appear to arbitrarily or
unjustifiably discriminate between different WTO Members where identical or similar sanitary
or phytosanitary conditions prevail.

• Article 3.1 and 3.3 of the SPS Agreement, because the measures do not appear to be based
on the relevant international standards, nor does there appear to be any scientific
justification for departing therefrom.

• Article 5.1 of the SPS Agreement, since the measures do not appear to be based on an risk
assessment, as appropriate to the circumstances. Consequently, the measures also appear
to be inconsistent with the obligations set out in Article 5.2 and 5.3 of the SPS Agreement.

• Article 5.4 of the SPS Agreement, because , when determining the appropriate level of
sanitary or phytosanitary protection, Panama appears not to have taken into account the
objective of minimizing negative trade effects.

• Article 5.6 of the SPS Agreement, because the measures appear to be more trade-restrictive
than required to achieve the appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection.
WT/DS599/1 • G/AG/GEN/179 • G/SPS/GEN/1873 • G/L/1383

• Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement, in that Panama's measures do not appear to meet the
requirements for the provisional measures established in this provision.

• Article 5.8 of the SPS Agreement, because, in spite of Costa Rica's requests, Panama has
not provided an explanation of the reasons for the measures.

• Article 6.1 of the SPS Agreement, given that the measures do not appear to be adapted to
the sanitary or phytosanitary characteristics of the area from which the product originated
and to which the product is destined.

• Article 7 and the provisions of Annex B of the SPS Agreement, because it appears that
Panama has failed to meet its transparency obligations with regard to the measures at issue.

• Article 8 and the provisions of Annex C of the SPS Agreement, since it appears that Panama
has failed to meet its o bligations regarding control, inspection and approval procedures in
relation to the measures at issue.

• Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, since Panama appears to have acted inconsistently with the
most-favoured-nation treatment obligation in relation to the measures at issue.

• Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994, because Panama appears to have acted inconsistently with
the obligation not to adopt import restrictions or prohibitions.

• Article 4.2 and note 1 of the Agreement on Agriculture, given that the measures at i ssue
appear to constitute "quantitative import restrictions", or in any case "similar […] measures",
within the meaning of note 1 of the Agreement on Agriculture.
Furthermore, the measures described in Section I of this request appear to nullify or impair the
benefits accruing to Costa Rica, directly or indirectly, under the SPS Agreement and the GATT 1994.
The measures do not appear to be justified under any provision of the WTO covered agreements.
Costa Rica reserves its right to raise other matters , whether factual or legal, during the course of
the consultations. T his request also covers any other amendments, replacements, extensions,
related measures or implementing measures that relate to the inconsistent measures at issue here.
Costa Rica looks forward to receiving Panama's reply to th is request and to setting a mutually
convenient date for consultations, with a view to resolving this dispute.