6) The Committee noted the activities related to the integration of risk analysis principles in the work of Codex, on the basis of the recommendations of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultations on Risk Analysis and on Risk Management.
7) The Committee had an exchange of views on the recommendation of the Commission concerning the clarification of the role of "other factors relevant for the health protection of consumers and for the promotion of fair practices in the food trade". The Delegation of Costa Rica referred to the last session of the CCRVDF where several countries of the region had emphasized the need to rely on scientific and technical principles in the decision process, in relation to the discussion of that Committee on the MRL for Bovine Somatotropine, eventually forwarded to Step 8. The Delegation pointed out that the issue of other factors should be further clarified and discussed at the regional level. Several delegations supported this view and expressed their concern with the fact that other factors were not clearly defined and therefore subject to different and possibly conflicting interpretations, which might result in barriers to trade. It was pointed out that the TBT Agreement mentions some legitimate factors and that a similar clarification would be necessary in the framework of Codex.
8) The Delegation of the United States, referring to the four Statements of Principles, expressed the view that the other factors relevant to health protection included concerns for vulnerable population groups with different levels of exposure, while specific trade problems could also be addressed in this framework. The Delegation of Argentina pointed out that the differences in regional diets should be taken into account as an important factor in relation to risk analysis.
9) The Committee recognized that further definition of "other factors" was required and that they should address objectives related to health protection or fair trade practices, as indicated in the second Statement of Principle. They should also be consistent with the mandate and competence of Codex. The Committee noted that the next session of the CCGP would consider two working papers on 1) consideration of other legitimate factors in the framework of risk analysis and 2) application in the case of BST, and recommended that the documents should be circulated well ahead of the session so that countries in the region could establish their position on this important subject.
10) As regards the status of Codex texts, the Delegations of Chile asked for clarification concerning the criteria which could be intended for application by commercial partners, especially whether this could include sanitary aspects, as these were clearly under the responsibility of governments. The Secretariat recalled that these criteria related to commercial quality and that food safety requirements (hygiene, additives, contaminants, pesticides) were always included in the main body of the standards in conformity with the format of Codex standards, as defined in the Procedural Manual.
11) The Committee noted that the CCGP was currently considering the means to improve consensus in the Codex decision process. The Delegation of the United States indicated that an informal meeting of the Chairpersons of Codex Committees, held during the CCGP session, had discussed the means to improve consensus on the basis of their experience in this area, and that they would share with the CCGP any suggestions which may come from such informal discussions.
12) The Delegation of Costa Rica referred to the problems of translation and interpretation into Spanish in the last session of the CCFH, in particular as regards the Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Packaged (Bottled) Waters, which the Committee could not finalize due to these problems, and the document on risk assessment. Several delegations shared this concern, pointing out that documents in Spanish were often received late and the quality of translation was inadequate. The Secretariat indicated that efforts were beinmade to address this problem, and the assistance of Spanish speaking countries in providing the exact terminology in Codex texts was very important; their positive contribution had in particular allowed to finalize the Guidelines and Principles on Microbiological Risk Assessment in the CCFH. The Delegation of the United States, on behalf of the Chairperson of the CCFH, informed the Committee that action was being taken to avoid further difficulties related to translation and interpretation in the future.
13) The Delegation of Brazil referred to the Draft Amendment to the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods - Labelling of Foods that can Cause Hypersensitivity, and expressed its disagreement with the inclusion of indiscriminate forms of "soybeans and products of these" in the list of such foods as refined soybean oil did not contain the protein fraction which cause allergenicity and that the list should be more specific, including only derived products which can actually cause hypersensitivity. This position was supported by Bolivia, Argentina and Dominican Republic.
14) The Secretariat recalled that the list was based on the recommendations of the Technical Consultation on Food Allergens (1996), and that the CCFL had forwarded it to Step 8 after careful consideration as it would contribute to address an important public health issue. The CCFL had also recognized the necessity to review the foods or food groups included in the list regularly on the basis of updated scientific information. For this purpose it had been agreed that JECFA would consider further scientific evidence concerning the foods that can cause hypersensitivity at its 53rd Session (1999). The Committee also noted that governments had the opportunity to provide their comments on the draft at Step 8 for consideration by the next session of the Commission[3].
