129. The Delegation of India, referring to earlier discussions in the 26th Session of the Commission and other Codex Committees, expressed the view that the “Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP)” should be clarified in the framework of Codex.. The Commission recalled its earlier decision[71] to take no further action, with the understanding that the issue might be reconsidered again in the future if required.
130. The Delegation of India further stated that the problems arising from continuous changes in methods of analysis resulting in lowered limits of detection should be addressed and sought to ascertain the progress of this matter. In this regard, the Representative of FAO informed the Commission that a Joint FAO/WHO Technical Workshop on Residues of Substances without ADI/MRL would be convened in August 2004 in Bangkok.
131. The Delegation of Mexico, referring to the discussions held at the 54th Session of the Executive Committee[72], expressed the view that “consensus” should be defined. The Delegation of France recalled that Proposal 34 (Determination of Consensus) was addressed in the Guidelines to Chairpersons of Codex Committees and ad hoc Intergovernmental Task Forces adopted at the current session and that the definition of “consensus” had been discussed in the development of that document. The Commission agreed to ask the Committee on General Principles to consider further the possibility of developing a definition of the term “consensus”.
132. The Commission adopted the following Terms of Reference of the Review:
a) With the objective of reducing the number of Codex meetings while also keeping them short and focused, the review should concentrate on:
- adequacy of the current structure of general subject committees to meet member countries’ needs in a flexible and timely manner;
- adequacy of the current structure of commodity committees to meet member countries’ needs in a flexible and timely manner;
- areas of overlap and areas where coverage of the subject matter is inadequate, taking into consideration the needs that were not covered or new issues that may arise in the future; and
- relationship between all committees and task forces, particularly the relations between commodity and general subject committees (task forces);
b) Based on a detailed study of the points above and inputs received from Codex chairs and host governments, and taking full account of the Report of the Evaluation of the Codex Alimentarius and other FAO and WHO Food Standards Work as well as ongoing work on specific subjects at the committee level, recommendations should be formulated for consideration by the Commission. These may include proposals for revision of the existing committee mandates with a view to rationalisation, proposals for redistribution of tasks and responsibilities between committees, and proposals to split or merge committees.
c) The recommendations to the Commission should also take into account the ability of all members of the Commission to participate in the standards development process, including the sustainability of the subsidiary body structures and their work programmes, especially in the light of the holding of annual sessions of the Commission and the operation of the FAO/WHO Trust Fund for Enhanced Participation in Codex.
133. The Commission agreed that the recruitment of a small team of consultants (three or four) would be initiated after the Commission and that the time frame presented in document ALINORM 04/27/10C would be followed in order that recommendations could be submitted to the 28th Session of the Commission.
134. The Delegation of Chile and the Delegation of Ireland, speaking on behalf of the Member States of the European Union present at the session, expressed the view that member countries should be consulted and involved in the process. The Commission therefore agreed that a Circular Letter would be sent to all Codex Members to ask for their views on the review of the mandates of Committees and Task Forces.
135. The Commission agreed that a Circular Letter would be issued to all Codex members to invite government comments in the following areas:
- Role of Regional Coordinating Committees in furthering the objectives of the Codex Alimentarius Commission;
- Membership of Regional Coordinating Committees, including their current geographic coverage;
- Terms of reference of the Regional Coordinating Committees as set out in the Procedural Manual, including the relevance of developing regional standards;
- Effectiveness of Regional Coordinating Committees in respect of country participation record and of venues and meeting intervals (currently every two years);
- Respective roles of the Regional Coordinator as ex officio Chairperson of the Regional Coordinating Committee and the Member(s) of the Executive Committee elected on a geographic basis, particularly within the framework of the Executive Committee; and
- Any other issues.
136. Regional Coordinating Committees, at their forthcoming session, would consider the comments from the governments of their respective Region and forward their view and/or recommendations to the 28th Session of the Commission for its consideration.
|
[70] ALINORM 04/27/10C;
LIM.20 (Comments of EC); LIM.23 (Comments of India) [71] ALINORM 03/41, para. 153 [72] ALINORM 04/27/4, para. 54. |
