136. The Commission recalled that as the follow up to a recommendation of the Joint FAO/WHO Evaluation of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and Other FAO and WHO Work on Food Standards conducted in 2002, a review of the Codex Committee Structure and Mandates of Codex Committees and Task Forces had been undertaken by a team of consultants60.
60 ALINORM 03/25/3, para. 108–110
137. The consultants' final report had been sent as a Circular Letter to all members and observers for comment. The 56th Session of the Executive Committee reviewed the recommendations in the consultants' final report in light of the comments received from members and observers in reply to the Circular Letter.
138. The Commission, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Executive Committee 61, endorsed the following recommendations62:
61 ALINORM 05/28/3A, para. 50–67
[1] A formal prioritization should be undertaken of all new work proposals, before resources are allocated.
[2] Steps should be taken to increase the proportion of work done by correspondence.
[3] A time limit should be set for the completion of each new project.
[8] Steps currently being taken to encourage collegial working within the Codex Secretariat should be encouraged.
[9] Maximum use should be made of working groups, bilateral, or other low-level contacts between sessions to reduce the time needed to reach consensus in plenary meetings.
139. The Delegation of Malaysia stressed that prioritization of new work proposals and resource allocations for standards development should take into consideration the interests of developing countries.
140. The Commission agreed that when work was done through correspondence or through working groups, due regard should be given to language coverage, geographical balance of participants and access conditions to Internet facilities, especially in developing countries. Some Members indicated that electronic working groups were more efficient for the initial stages of standards development than in the later stages.
141. Some delegations emphasized that time limits should be applied with certain flexibility and that the science-base of Codex texts and the consensus-building process of Codex should not be compromised.
142. The Commission further endorsed the following recommendations:
[13] All committees should be encouraged to adopt a more systematic approach to self-management.
[14] CCFAC should be split into separate Additives and Contaminants committees.
[15] The General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA) should be the single authoritative reference point for food additives and this should be made clear in all commodity standards.
143. The Delegation of the Netherlands, as host government of the Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants, stated that the current workload of the Committee was too heavy and the large number of working groups that needed to operate under the present framework raised concern from the viewpoint of transparency. The Delegation supported the recommendation to split the Committee into two, and offered to host the Contaminant Committee. The Delegation of Brazil also expressed its interest in hosting the new Contaminant Committee. The Commission requested the Secretariat to prepare the Terms of Reference for each of the new committees and present them at the next sessions of the Committee on General Principles and the Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants, with a view to their adoption and the designation of host countries at the next session of the Commission.
144. Several Members requested clarification of Recommendation 15. The Commission noted that under the current Codex rules and procedures, Commodity Committees had the mandate to develop the lists of additives taking into account technological needs and to submit them for endorsement by CCFAC. The Commission recognized that the GSFA, still under development, would become the single authoritative reference point for food additives when completed and the ongoing work of the Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants in this regard.
145. The Commission endorsed the following recommendations by further modifying those recommended by the Executive Committee:
[16] All requests from the Codex subsidiary bodies for JECFA advice on additives and contaminants should be routed exclusively through the Additives or Contaminants Committees and requests for JECFA advice on residues of veterinary drugs through the Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Food.
[7] Regular informal meetings of Codex chairs and vice chairs of the Commission should be encouraged in conjunction with Codex sessions. Provisions of secretarial support could be considered to produce a summary of the main points discussed, which could be made available to all Codex Members. The Codex Secretariat is encouraged to explore the use of Internet technologies to facilitate continued communication among Codex Chairs.
146. With regard to Recommendation 16 above, the Commission noted that the Commission itself had the authority to request scientific advice from FAO and WHO on any relevant subject. In relation to Recommendation 7, an observer expressed concern about possible lack of transparency. The Commission noted that the outcome of these meetings would be made available to all members and observers.
147. The Commission agreed with the Executive Committee's view and did not support the following recommendations in the Consultants' Final Report:
[10] All standard-setting work should be subject to a greater degree of management oversight. Specifically, a new Commodities Management Committee should be established to manage the preparation and updating of commodity standards.
[12] The circumstances in which the Executive Committee, or some other body, should carry out a similar management role for other committees should be carefully considered by the Commission.
[17] Consideration should be given to re-writing the terms of reference of the Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling and re-assigning responsibility for specifying methods of analysis and sampling to the committee specifying the relevant limits.
[20] Provision for the drafting of regional standards should be removed from the terms of reference of the Regional Coordinating Committees.
148. The Commission agreed that the Executive Committee should play a pivotal role in exercising standards management oversight. While agreeing to retain the current terms of reference for the Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling, the Commission agreed with the view of the Executive Committee that the terms of reference of the Committee on Food Hygiene should clearly state that it could address methods related to microbiological specifications, currently referred to in a footnote in the Procedural Manual.
149. The Commission agreed with the view of the Executive Committee that development of regional standards be retained in the terms of reference of Coordinating Committees, while noting that care should be taken so that proposals to convert regional standards into worldwide standards did not hinder the work programme management of commodity committees.
150. The Commission agreed that there was no need to take specific action on the following recommendations:
[5] Codex should review its remit to ensure that it conforms more closely to the current expectations of its members, having particular regard to the implications of the WTO Agreements.
[19] The Committee on Meat Hygiene should now be wound up. The Committee on Food Hygiene should consider the possibility for drafting a set of general guidelines to help rationalize hygiene provisions in commodity standards.
151. The Commission noted that the Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat had been adopted at the present session of the Commission and the Committee on Meat Hygiene would be adjourned sine die.
152. In relations to Recommendation 5, many delegations stressed that Codex should maintain its independence from WTO and remain true to its dual objectives, i.e. to protect the health of consumers and to ensure fair practices in the food trade while basing its work on sound science.
153. The Commission recalled that the Commission had reviewed its relations to WTO in conjunction with the 1991 FAO/WHO Conference of Food Standards and Chemicals in Food, the 2002 Codex Evaluation and the ongoing revision work of the Code of Ethics in International Trade in Food.
154. The Commission concluded that there was no support for Codex to review its remit, while acknowledging the need to maintain close collaboration with the SPS and TBT Committees of WTO, given the status of Codex standards as international reference points in the framework of these Agreements as well as the need to maintain independence from WTO.
155. The Commission agreed that the following recommendations required further study.
[4] Whenever possible, committees should be given enabling terms of reference only. They should be reactivated as necessary to undertake defined tasks and adjourned sine die once the task is completed.
[6] The relevance of the work of other international standards setting bodies should be determined, and a clear statement of demarcation lines made clear to all participants.
[11] All commodity committees and task forces should be given simple terms of reference which should be revised for a limited period only, to assign specific tasks to the committees.
[18] The Commission should consider carefully whether nutrition should play a role in Codex, and if so, what that role should be.
156. The Commission agreed that the role of Codex in nutrition should be considered in light of the role Codex could play in the implementation of WHO's Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health (see paras. 228233).
157. The Delegation of Argentina expressed the view that it would be necessary to convene an FAO/WHO workshop, on the same lines as the one convened for the provision of scientific advice to Codex, the object of which would be to discuss in depth and on a wide basis the structural changes required to respond to future challenges. The Delegation also pointed out that it would be important that the Codex Secretariat should also give their opinion in this respect on the basis of their experience.
158. The Commission agreed that a Circular Letter be sent to members and observers to solicit comments on Recommendations 4, 6, and 11 above, particularly in the context of possible re-organization of Codex commodity work, including combining committees and adjusting the frequency/interval of meetings, while further analysing the workload of commodity committees as well as the relationship between vertical committees and horizontal committees. The Commission agreed to consider this issue at its next session in the light of comments received.
159. The Commission noted that consideration could be given to convening a workshop in conjunction with the next session of the Committee on General Principles, in order to allow countries to exchange their views on this matter in a broad context.
