Page 172 - CW E-Magazine (20-2-2024)

Special Report Special Report

POLICY ADVOCACY PAPER cloprid to the limit of determination tration that can be detected and identi- that is to be evaluated in a risk assess-
[0.01-ppm] for all uses and to refuse fi ed for a vast majority of the pesticides ment under Article 5.1 is not only risk
Recent European Parliament Resolution denying any requests for import tolerance ...” while using Gas Chromatography-Mass ascertainable in a science laboratory
Spectroscopy (GC-MS) technique of operating under strictly controlled con-
import tolerance is bad in WTO law The directive from the European analysis. It is clear that the EU import ditions, but also the risk in human so-
Parliament to the EFSA simply means tolerant MRL policy is driven by the cieties as they actually exist .... There
Background countries to introduce sanitary or phyto- SHUNMUGAM GANESAN this: The EFSA should not accept in sensitivity of the instrument and not must be a rational relationship between
n 11th January 2024, the sanitary measures including pesticide Advisor future any request for raising the import based on risk assessment as required the measure and the risk assessed.”
European Parliament adopted MRLs, as long as the following condi- Trade Related International Agreements tolerance MRL from 0.01-ppm for pes- under the SPS Agreement. This is
Oa Resolution (B9-0057/2024) tions, amongst others, are met: CENTEGRO ticides no longer used in the EU. unacceptable. None of these factors are true for
(Resolution) [https://www.europarl. Email: ganesanicc@gmail.com the EU’s hazard-based import tolerance
europa.eu/doceo/document/B-9-2 024-  They are taken only to the extent Website.indianagriculturalfacts.com It is signifi cant to note that Codex The European Parliament Resolu- of 0.01-ppm.
0057_EN .pdf] that will have adverse necessary to protect human, animal has established Acceptable Daily Intake tion should be held to be an act in
consequences on the export of agricul- or plant life or health and are based lawfully imported and sold if the (ADI) as well as the MRL for Thia- contravention of the WTO law Risk assessment consistent with
tural commodities to the EU from non- on scientifi c evidence and not main- import contains residues of pesticides cloprid. The Codex MRLs for Thiacloprid the SPS Agreement is a sine qua non
EU countries. tained without suffi cient scientifi c not used in the importing country (but in various foods and feeds go up to There are several reasons. Major for determining the MRLs. The Annex
evidence (Article 2.2); used in the exporting country). 10-ppm. A Codex MRL is one of the tools ones are listed below: A-4 of the SPS Agreement defi nes “risk
The Resolution imposes a  They do not arbitrarily or unjustifi - for ensuring that the pesticide residue assessment” as the evaluation of the

hazard-based pesticides (Maximum ably discriminate between Mem- Granting import tolerance MRL intake does not exceed the Acceptable The Resolution is inconsistent with the potential for adverse effects on human
Reside Level) MRL of 0.01-ppm and bers where identical or similar con- based on the data submitted by the ex- Daily Intake (ADI). The Codex MRLs provisions of SPS Agreement or animal health arising from the pre-
disallows risk-based MRLs for all the ditions prevail, including between porting country ensures smooth fl ow of enjoy the presumption of consistency Globally, determining pesticide sence of ... contaminants ... [including
pesticide no longer used in the EU. their own territory and that of other trade. Obtaining the import tolerance with SPS Agreement. Surprisingly, the MRLs is governed by the legal frame- residues of pesticides] in food, bever-
Members and are not applied in a MRL should be relatively easier when European Parliament opted to com- work established under the SPS ages or feed stuff. The SPS Agreement
Our analysis shows that this Resolu- manner which would constitute a Codex MRL exists for the pesticide pletely ignore the international stan- Agreement. Determining and imple- requires assessment of the potential
tion goes completely against the bind- disguised restriction on internatio- concerned. dards set by the Codex. menting pesticide MRLs is not an adverse effects on human health arising
ing provisions of the WTO Sanitary nal trade (Article 2.3); unfettered right in the hands of Member from the presence of contaminants in
and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement to  They are based on an assessment as However, it is important to note that Earlier, in November 2023, the countries of the WTO. They have the food as held by the AB in EC-Hormone

which all the 27 countries of the EU are appropriate to the circumstances, the term “import tolerance MRL” is European Parliament Environment Com- right to restrict international trade case, para 206.
Members. of the risks to human life or health, not to be found in the text of the SPS mittee rejected a proposal to revise the for the protection of human, plant, or
etc. arising from the presence of Agreement. This term seems to be an hazard-based import tolerance MRL animal health against trade-related The EU has not produced risk
What is import tolerance MRL? contaminants in food, beverage or invention in recent years. from 0.01-ppm to a risk-based MRL risks only when such measures are assessments demonstrating existence
MRL is the maximum acceptable feedstuffs (Article 5.1 read with of 0.09-ppm for Tricyclazole, a popu- consistent with the relevant princi- of adverse effects from the presence of
level of a pesticide residue that is Annex A). The impugned European Parliament lar fungicide used extensively by rice ples of the WTO, in general, and SPS 0.01-ppm of pesticide residue (contami-
legally tolerated in agricultural pro- Resolution growing countries, including India. Agreement, in particular. nants). Remember, 0.01-ppm equals 1
ducts when they are traded. It is often In the European Union (EU), pes- gm of a pesticide residue in 100-tonnes
measured and expressed in terms of ticide MRLs are governed by Regula- On 11th Jan 2024, the European The reasons cited for not revis- The underlying principle in the Reso- of food commodity. At this trace level, a
parts per million (ppm) or mg/kg. tion (EC) No. 396/2005 and 1107/2009. Parliament adopted a Resolution refus- ing the hazard-based import tolerance lution is not based on risk-assessment contaminant would not be biologically,
These regulations support hazard-based ing to revise the import tolerance MRL MRLs, among others, include the nega- Each WTO Member must base toxicologically or environmentally
Import tolerance MRL is the MRL assessment of food safety and not the upwards from the current 0.01-ppm for tive impact on the competitiveness of their phytosanitary measures (includ- relevant.
set by an importing country for a pesti- risk-based assessment as required in the the pesticide, Thiacloprid, despite posi- the EU farmers who are deprived of ing pesticide MRLs) on scientifi c evi-
cide not registered within that country, SPS Agreement. tive recommendation from the European using the same pesticides as third country dence and risk-assessment, which are In 2020, in response to a complaint
to meet the needs of international trade Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The farmers for effective control of certain substantive requirements under the before the SPS Committee, the EU had
among the WTO Members. Why is import tolerance MRL neces- Parliament Resolution inter alia, held pests. SPS Agreement. “Theoretical uncer- in fact admitted that their pesticide
sary? and observed: tainty is not the kind of risk to be MRL of 0.01-ppm is not based on a
The SPS Agreement governs the Use of pesticides considerably vary “ ...... MRLs should not be set for Why does the EU assign the default assessed under Article 5.1” of the SPS risk evaluation as required by the SPS
determination of SPS measures including among countries, depending on the active substances that are not approved MRL value of 0.01-ppm to all pesti- Agreement as held by the Appellate Agreement. “ ... given the concerns
pesticide MRLs. The SPS Agreement crops grown, pests and diseases pre- in the Union due to health concerns; cides no longer used in the EU, but still Body (AB) Report in the EC-Hormone identifi ed by EFSA, it is not possible
recognizes only those MRLs derived sent. ....... therefore no import tolerances used in many other countries outside case, para 186. to determine MRLs based on a risk
from “risk assessment”. should be set for Thiacloprid .... the EU? assessment and therefore all MRLs must
In many WTO Member countries, ...... Commission to submit a new It further states in para 187: “It is be lowered to the limit of determina-
The agreement enables Member food/feed commodities may not be draft .... lowering all MRLs for Thia- The 0.01-ppm is the lowest concen- essential to bear in mind that the risk tion”— EU statement before SPS Com-

172 Chemical Weekly February 20, 2024 Chemical Weekly February 20, 2024 173

Contents Index to Advertisers Index to Products Advertised