OTO No.(626)

Provisional Translation

OTO No.	626	Classification	MAFF-92
Date of Acceptance	November 7, 2000	Ministry/Agency Receiving Complaint	Cabinet Office (Economic Planning Agency)
Responsible Ministries	Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery	Related Laws	Plant Protection Law
Complainant	New Zealand Embassy	Exporting Countries
Subject	Japan's policy on the list of harmful non-quarantine animals and plants
Description of Complaint	(1) Under Japan's Plant Protection Law system, all organisms other than the 63 species that are specified in the non-quarantine plant and animal pest list are automatically classified as harmful animals or plants subject to quarantine. This system lacks scientific grounds. (2) The Japanese government should shift from the system of presenting the non-quarantine plant and animal pest list to that of presenting harmful quarantine-required ones. (3) The government should take a transitional step where organisms that have been scientifically justified by third countries are added to the non-quarantine plant and animal pest list.
Details of Measures	1.The ministry replied as follows: (1) Under Japan's plant protection system, the only organisms that are liable to cause damage to useful plants and have negative influence on Japanese agriculture are subject to the import quarantine. None of the organisms, which do not damage domestic plants, are subject to quarantine. (2) Japan's import quarantine system differs from that of New Zealand so that the two countries' procedures for making quarantine lists are different. Regarding the complaint, we should consider the essential issue of how to best prevent the penetration of harmful quarantine-required animals and plants, in consideration of both countries' conditions. It is inappropriate to discuss the issue based only on the way of making the lists. (3) About additions to the non-quarantine plant and animal pest list, the ministry will continue to examine risks involved in harmful plants and animals, and those causing no harm to domestic agricultural production will be gradually added to the list. Through these, the ministry will implement plant quarantine in accordance with risks involved in harmful animals and plants. (This case was continuously examined at the problem-raising process in fiscal 2001. See III 1 (7) in 7th Report of the Market Access Ombudsman Council.) 2. The ministry has taken the following actions after the reply: After that, at the Japan-New Zealand Plant Quarantine Expert Meeting in April 2003, the ministry explained that Japan would continue to comply with international rules. Japan also conducted technical discussions and research on specific individual cases (e.g. kiwi fruit) by dispatching Japanese experts to New Zealand. In response to recommendations made in the report issued by the Study Group on Plant Quarantine on May 21, 2004, the ministry sent a letter to New Zealand about future efforts (Japan will make efforts to present a schedule for the future, etc. at the SPS Committee to be held in Geneva in June 2004) on the same date. The ministry has newly added 46 species to the non-quarantine plant and animal pest list through the revision of the Enforcement Regulations of the Plant Protection Law in April 2005. The ministry will also conduct pest risk analysis (PRA) of harmful pests existing in Japan after collecting information about the status of distribution in Japan, the status of pest control and the existence of varieties with different properties in other countries, and will add species to the non-quarantine plant and animal pest list if it is considered that there will be no problem removing them from the subject of import quarantine measures. The case was closed due to the above action.
Classification of Processing	Ca	Directions	I-a I-b
Remarks	A written reply was made on November 17, 2000. Problems were raised and handling policy was examined at the problem-raising process in fiscal 2001.

Go to TOP