54. The Committee noted the background to the document and the fact that the 45th Session of the Executive Committee had approved the development of the draft guidelines as new work at Step 1 of the Procedure[10]. The paper was introduced by the delegations of United Kingdom and Australia, the author countries. As the text had not been formally circulated to governments and interested international organizations for comment, the Committee agreed to receive the views of participating delegations on the document. The debate focussed on the Annex to the working document containing the proposed draft Guideline and Criteria for a Generic Official Certificate Format.
GENERAL ISSUES
55. Several delegations stressed the urgency of finalizing work on the Guidelines in order to provide a framework for the development of certificates for specific commodities by Codex Commodity Committees. Nevertheless, there was a general opinion that the document needed to be redrafted to take into account a number of related issues, including many that were raised in the debate reported below. It was also suggested that the document should deal with the proper attestation of certificates following consignments that were split before final destination.
TITLE
56. Most of the comments supported the use of an expanded title consistent with the title of the text as approved by the Executive Committee or the full title as indicated in the present Agenda Item. It was noted, however, that the Committee had the right to propose changes to this title as might be required during the subsequent elaboration of the text.
OBJECTIVES
57. Several Delegations stressed the need to include a consideration of the principles or rationale behind the use of certificates that would contain in particular a statement to the effect that certification was non-mandatory and that other procedures such as mutual recognition agreements could be used in place of certificates. It was also indicated that the guidelines should cover the development of certificates and their management and that the actual format of and content of certificates should be developed by individual Codex Commodity Committees or other parties for areas not covered by Codex work. The need to make provisions for electronic forms of certificates was highlighted by several delegations.
GENERAL FORMAT OF CERTIFICATE
Standard Format
58. Several delegations noted that this sub-section did not deal with matters concerning the Standard Format and therefore a re-organization or re-ordering of the paragraphs would be required. It was suggested that the headings “General Format of Certificate” and “Criteria” be exchanged. It was suggested that there was a need for the text to be more explicit or more detail provided in relation to the identification and/or nature of the product. It was also pointed out that the document did not seem to cover all available forms of certificates and their type and characteristics (sanitary or quality certificates; certificates covering mixed consignments; multiple but connected pages to single certificates; etc.). It was further stressed that the text should specify that there should be one Original certificate regardless of the number of copies and that one copy of the certificate as well as the identification number should be retained by the certifying authority.
59. In addition it was proposed that any change in the circumstances of the certifying authority be communicated promptly to the importing country. Some delegations recommended that some of the terms used in the text (attestation, seal, approved stamp, etc.) should be defined and that the period of validity of the certificate should bear an appropriate relationship with the life of the product.
60. In regard to the languages to be used in certificates, it was proposed that certificates should be in a language comprehensible to the certifying officer and in at least one of the official languages of the country of destination.
Responsibilities of Certifying Officers
61. Some delegations suggested that this section should be deleted since it was not consistent with the purpose of the document. A number of delegations were of the opinion that this section should describe the obligations and responsibilities of certifying authorities and certifying officers and should make reference to issues such as;
62. Several delegations drew attention to the conceptual and practical problems inherent in certifying information ascertained by a person other than the certifying officer. They were of the opinion that this provision required further elaboration to provide for, inter alia, attestations in writing, information derived from other competent authorities, and information obtained from official or officially recognized food quality and safety programmes or systems.
Instructions for Completing the Form
63. It was noted that this sub-section contained provisions related to completing and issuing of certificates and should therefore be re-titled. It was also pointed out that there was no provision for electronic forms of certification. Several delegations requested clarification of the persons and/or authorities to which the original and copies of the certificate should be provided.
64. Several delegations were of the opinion that the rules for the issuance of “Duplicate” certificates should be expanded and should indicate that such certificates were issued as full replacements for original certificates that were then no longer valid.
65. It was pointed out that several of the details contained in this sub-section were either not essential or were not practical, such as the provision that certificates should not be capable of being photocopied.
CRITERIA
66. Several delegations questioned the specific criteria proposed for inclusion in certificates. In particular, it was suggested that “consignee” or “port of entry” should replace the term “product destination” and that reference should also be made to the “consignor”. Many delegations questioned the provision requiring the certificate to specify the country of origin of ingredients, stating that this would be either impossible or at least very difficult and some delegations suggested deleting this provision. It was proposed that there be a definition of “country of origin” that would take into account the country of despatch, country of processing and country of production.
67. It was suggested that for products that needed to be held or transported under specific temperature conditions, that these conditions should also be specified on the certificate.
STATUS OF THE PROPOSED DRAFT GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR OFFICIAL CERTIFICATE FORMATS AND RULES RELATING TO THE PRODUCTION AND ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES
68. The Committee noted the interest in this work, but agreed that further work and additional contributions were required in order to agree upon an appropriate text. The Committee agreed to request the Delegations of the United Kingdom and Australia to re-draft the Guidelines in light of the views expressed in the present discussion and in the Conference Room Documents with a view towards circulating the text formally for comments at Step 3 of the Codex Procedure and consideration at its next Session.
