12. The Commission received reports concerning the 19th and 20th Sessions of the Executive Committee held in Geneva from 3–5 July 1973 and in Rome on 28 June 1974, respectively. The Report of the 20th Session of the Executive Committee is reproduced as Appendix II to this Report. In introducing the reports, the Chairman indicated that most of the substantive items considered by the Executive Committee would be dealt with by the Commission under the agenda items relating to the matters concerned. The following were the matters dealt with under this item of the agenda.
13. The Commission noted that the Executive Committee had had before it at its 19th Session the text of the above-mentioned Resolution concerning the activities of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Executive Committee had noted that the background to the Resolution appeared to be the controversial nature of a draft standard for canned sardines. The Executive Committee had considered that it would be inappropriate for the Director-General of FAO to take any action on the Resolution in view of the narrowness and controversial nature of the subject of sardines. The Executive Committee had recommended therefore that the attention of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products should be drawn to the concern felt in Latin America about the draft standard for canned sardines. The Executive Committee had further suggested that the Resolution could be reconsidered by a Coordinating Committee for Latin America should such a Committee be established. The Executive Committee had emphasized, however, that contrary to the views expressed in the Resolution, a principal aim of the Codex Alimentarius Commission was in fact to facilitate international trade by the removal of obstacles to trade arising from differing national food legislations.
14. The Commission concurred in the views which had been expressed by the Executive Committee and noted that the concern felt in Latin America about the draft standard for canned sardines had been brought to the attention of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products.
15. The Commission noted that the above Code had been discussed by the Executive Committee at its 19th and 20th Sessions on the basis of information concerning the Proposed Code which had been made available by the GATT Secretariat and also on the basis of some observations of the Codex Secretariat. The Proposed Code itself, however, had not been available to the Members of the Executive Committee, because it was a restricted document in GATT. The observer from GATT was invited to address the Commission on the subject of the Proposed Code. He outlined (i) the general background to the preparation of the Proposed Code, (ii) the general scheme of the Code, and (iii) recent developments with respect to the Code in the context of the current GATT multilateral trade negotiations. The statement of the observer from GATT is reproduced as Appendix III to this Report. The Commission also noted that there was a Working Party in GATT dealing with packaging and labelling. The Commission took note of the point made by the Executive Committee that, while the objectives of the Proposed GATT Code were very similar to those of the Codex Alimentarius, there might be difficulties concerning the obligations to be undertaken by signatories to the Code and countries accepting Codex standards. The Commission also noted the point that some of the provisions of the Code might not be suitable for food products, where Food and Drug type legislation applied. However, the delegation of Canada pointed out that in the drafting of the GATT Code amendments had been made which, in their opinion, permitted countries to interpret portions of this Code as not being appropriate to food standards. Canada indicated its intention to use this interpretation when it did not deem it possible to apply the Code to mandatory food standards based on considerations related to health or the protection of the consumer against fraud.
16. After several delegations had drawn attention to matters which needed to be followed closely in the context of the possible implications of the work in GATT for the work of the Commission, the following course of action was decided upon by the Commission.
The Codex Secretariat should maintain close liaison with the GATT, both as regards the Proposed GATT Code and other work in GATT having possible implications for the work of the Commission, e.g. the work of the Working Party in GATT on packaging and labelling. This liaison should operate in both directions and it was important that GATT be fully aware of the scope and nature of the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Codex Secretariat should supply GATT with the relevant Codex material.
Since GATT was taking account, as far as possible, of the work of other international organizations, and as discussions have already been initiated by GATT with FAO, it was important that WHO, the other parent body of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, should also be consulted as health considerations in relation to food were primarily a matter for WHO.
The GATT Secretariat should be requested to make copies of the Proposed Code available to the Codex Secretariat for distribution to Members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission for study and comment. The Code, when sent to Members of the Commission, should be accompanied by a brief note by the Codex Secretariat, drawing attention to the essential points of interest in the Code from the point of view of the Codex Alimentarius.
Members of the Commission should arrange to have the Code examined against the Codex Acceptance Procedure to determine whether any conflict of obligations for governments might arise between the Code and the Codex Acceptance Procedure.
The subject of the Proposed Code should be reviewed again at the next session of the Executive Committee in the light of government comments with a view to being able to report to the 11th Session of the Commission.
17. The Commission noted that this matter had been discussed by the Executive Committee at its 19th Session and that it was a question which had arisen in the Committee of Government Experts on the Code of Principles concerning Milk and Milk Products. The Commission agreed with the views of the Executive Committee on this subject, as set forth in paragraphs 37 to 41 of ALINORM 74/3. In particular, the Commission agreed with the view of the Executive Committee that it was not essential to arrive at a definite recommendation at this stage, since the controversial issues had been resolved within the Milk and Milk Products Committee on a pragmatic basis and might not arise again in the immediate future.
18. The Commission noted that the above subject had been considered by the Executive Committee at its 19th Session and agreed with the views of the Executive Committee as expressed in paragraphs 43 to 45 of ALINORM 74/3. In particular, the Commission agreed with the recommendation that as the feasibility of introducing a Codex mark or symbol was very doubtful, and that as any advantages that might be derived therefrom would be largely outweighed by the difficulties, this subject should not be pursued.
19. The Commission noted that the question of the feasibility of the elaboration of a Code of Ethics for the international trade in food had been considered by the Executive Committee at its 19th and 20th sessions. As instructed by the 19th Session of the Executive Committee, the Secretariat had sent a circular letter to governments inviting them to give their views on the feasibility of elaborating such a Code. Governments which did not consider the development of such a Code to be feasible were requested to give reasons for their views. Governments which were in favour of developing such a Code were requested to indicate (i) what matters the Code ought to cover, and (ii) how the Code could be applied. Replies had been received from Denmark, New Zealand, Poland, Sweden, United States of America, Zaire and Zambia.
20. Whilst the Commission noted that, from the replies mentioned above, which had been considered by the Executive Committee at its 20th Session, there was no strong body of opinion in favour of a Code of Ethics as such, the Commission considered that it would be necessary to have the views of many more countries before deciding on the question of elaborating such a Code. The Commission instructed the Secretariat to send a further circular letter to governments on this subject. The Commission considered that this subject should be considered by the Codex Committee on General Principles at its next session.
21. The Commission also noted that the Executive Committee had considered a possible alternative to a Code of Ethics would be a resumption of work on the General Standard for Food. The Commission agreed, without prejudice to the decisions which the Codex Committee on General Principles might take on this general topic at its next session, that the United Kingdom, who were the authors of the General Standard, should be requested to re-examine the General Standard with the view to incorporating as far as practicable the objectives of the proposed Code of Ethics. The Commission considered that all aspects of this matter should be considered by the Codex Committee on General Principles at its next session.
22. The Commission noted that this subject had been brought to the attention of the Executive Committee at its 19th Session, not because of any recent wish in the matter expressed by the Commission, but simply because the Executive Committee at its 14th Session had requested the Secretariat to bring this matter before the Executive Committee again at a future date. The Commission agreed with the recommendation of the Executive Committee that, in the light of the Commission's current workload and the financial situation of the Programme, consideration of this subject should be adjourned sine die.
23. The delegation of Argentina requested that it be recorded in the report that, as copies of the report of the 19th Session of the Executive Committee had not reached Argentina, in sufficiently good time, Argentina had been unable to comment on that report.
24. The Commission had before it a list of Members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The membership as at 11 July is set out below. The Commission noted that since its last session membership had increased by seven countries and that 105 countries were now Members of the Commission. The seven new Members of the Commission were as follows: Libyan Arab Republic, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, United Arab Emirates, Panama, Gabon and Swiziland.
Europe
North America
Latin America
Africa
South-West Pacific
Asia
* New Members since the 9th Session of the Commission
25. The Commission, like the Executive Committee, noted with great satisfaction the considerable progress which had been made by Members of the Commission in either accepting Recommended Codex Standards or initiating action on the standards with a view to giving acceptance to them. Full details of the acceptances and action notes submitted by governments were contained in documents ALINORM 74/6, Parts I-XI, plus certain addenda. The Commission noted that, whilst most of the acceptances had been received from developing countries, acceptances had also been received from a number of developed countries and many other developed countries had indicated that they were engaged in a thorough study of the standards with a view to incorporating them as far as feasible in their national legislations. However, the delegate of the Sudan pointed out that situation made the developing countries rather apprehensive in that their acceptance of Codex standards would throw on them obligations which they might not be able to meet. The Commission noted that the information which had been made available for the current session concerning acceptances was additional to that which had been put before the Commission at its 9th Session, details of which were recorded in Appendix III to the Report of the 9th Session of the Commission.
26. Several delegations which had not furnished written reports on action being taken in their countries concerning acceptance, indicated verbally what action was being taken in their countries. The observer from the European Economic Community (EEC) referred to action already taken in the EEC concerning certain standards for sugars, for which a Community Directive had been adopted and also to the fact that the EEC had drawn up an action programme which covered practically all Recommended Codex Standards at Step 9. Details of action within the EEC had been supplied by several Member Countries of the EEC in their written statements.
27. The Commission agreed with the Executive Committee that the amendments proposed to the Acceptance Procedure by the Codex Committee on General Principles would, in all probability, accelerate the receipt of acceptances from governments. The Commission strongly endorsed the concern expressed by the Executive Committee that the evaluation and publication of these acceptances would represent a very considerable increase in the workload of the Secretariat, and that FAO/WHO should recognize the importance which Member Governments attached to this aspect of the Commission's activities and the great importance and significance of this work in the interests of international trade.
28. The Commission concluded its discussions on this subject by urging governments to continue to give the fullest attention to the Recommended Standards with a view to adopting them, to the greatest degree possible, in their national legislations. The latest position on acceptances is summarized in tabular form, on a standard by standard basis, in Appendix VI to this report.
29. The Commission had before it ALINORM 74/7, containing details of the budget for 1974/75 and also, for purposes of comparison, details of the budget for 1972/73. The Commission noted that the budget for 1974/75 had been reviewed by the Executive Committee at its 20th Session. The Commission noted that the cut-back of 10% which had been applied to the Programme in 1972/73 and carried through 1974/75 had created real problems in the Secretariat in carrying out its important role of seeking acceptances of Codex Standards by governments. Whilst the Commission noted the difficulties which had faced FAO and WHO as a result of currency fluctuations and inflationery trends, the Commission emphasized that efforts should be made to give greater priority to the current activities of the Commission, as well as to the need to ensure adequate and proper provision for the continued expansion of the work of the Commission through 1975, 1976 and 1977. The Commission strongly endorsed the views of the Executive Committee concerning the staffing of the Programme.
30. The Commission considered that, in view of the reduction in professional staff of the Secretariat, arrangements should be made by FAO/WHO to ensure that the position of the associate expert currently paid for by the Federal Republic of Germany should be continued under the Regular Programme of Work and Budget of FAO/WHO from mid-1975 and through the biennium 1976/77, to guarantee adequate and continued servicing of Codex meeting and preparation of technical documentation. The Commission also endorsed the recommendation of the Executive Committee that for the biennium 1976/77, a further professional post, with secretarial assistance, should be established in the Codex Secretariat concerned primarily with the question of securing government acceptances from Member Governments, their evaluation, Classification and prompt publication.
31. The Commission considered that the above action on the part of FAO/WHO was necessary for the reasons mentioned above, but also in order that the Programme should not lose momentum at a crucial stage. The Commission noted that the 25th Session of the FAO Programme Committee (May 1974) had placed similar emphasis on the need to assist countries through the Programme with acceptance of Codex Standards and the development of food control infrastructures. The Commission expressed its appreciation to the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany for making an associate expert available to the Programme.
32. As requested by the Commission at its last session, when it agreed in principle to the establishment of a Coordinating Committee for Latin America, the Commission had before it at its present session document ALINORM 74/8, setting out the administrative and financial implications of establishing a Coordinating Committee for Latin America. This document had been reviewed by the Executive Committee at its 20th Session, during the course of which the representative of Latin America informed the Executive Committee that it was the opinion of the Region that the Coordinating Committee could, from a financial point of view, be more conveniently held in conjunction with sessions of the Codex Alimentarius Commission at FAO or WHO headquarters, and that provision should be made in the Regular Budgets of the Organizations to meet the costs involved. The representative of Latin America had further indicated that the modest financial provisions envisaged in document ALINORM 74/8 could, in the event of a Member Country of Latin America offering to host a session of the Coordinating Committee for Latin America, be utilized to enable the Secretariat of the Commission to attend the meeting and carry out its normal secretarial duties. The Executive Committee, having also noted that Dr. E. Méndez (Mexico), a Vice-Chairman of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, was in Complete agreement with the proposals of the representative of Latin America, had recommended to the Commission that a Coordinating Committee for Latin America be established.
33. Having received the strong support of delegations from Latin America during the course of the Commission's session, the Commission agreed to establish a Coordinating Committee for Latin America with the following membership and terms of reference:
“Membership:
Membership of the Committee is open to all Member Nations and Associate Members of FAO and/or WHO which are Members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, within the geographic location of Latin America.Functions:
The Committee exercises general coordination in the preparation of standards relating to the region of Latin America and exercises such other functions as may be entrusted to it by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.”
34. The Commission noted with appreciation the kind offer of the Government of Mexico to host at its own expense an FAO/WHO Food Standards Regional Conference for Latin America in Either 1977 or 1978. The Government of Mexico would meet the local expenses of the conference facilities, secretarial assistance, translation and interpretation, but not the travel or expenses of delegates. The Commission warmly welcomed this proposal which had also been recommended to it for endorsement by the Executive Committee.
35. The Commission noted that the Secretariat had been requested to prepare a paper on the role of coordinators in general and that this matter would be discussed further in connection with the Report of the Coordinating Committee for Africa.
