| TOP |
| 6th Report of Market Access Ombudsman Council (March 16, 2000) |
1. Complainant: Korean Embassy
2. Ministry concerned: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
3. Complaint:
As a result of overzealous application of quarantine standards by Japanese quarantine bureau officials unnecessary, fumigation is lowering the product quality of fresh vegetables (cucumbers, eggplants, chili peppers, lettuce, cabbage) and flowers (roses, lilies, chrysanthemums) exported from Korea, and exporters are being made to bear unnecessary expenses for quarantine.
In particular, the following five pests are currently widely distributed in Japan and since quarantine measures are excessive, they should be placed on the list of quarantine-exempt pests.
1] Thrips palmi
2] Franklinniella occidentalis
3] Myzus persicae
4] Macrosiphum euphorbac
5] Acarus siro
4. Corresponding Policy of the Ministries concerned:
Regarding the five pests the complainant requests be placed on the non-quarantine pests list, four of them - Thrips palmi, Franklinniella occidentalis, Myzus persicae, and Macrosiphum euphorbac - are important pests whose presence is under surveillance in Japan. When necessary as a result of surveillance, the government sets out the outlines of an eradication program, or makes recommendations concerning eradication which local governments carry out. Because of this, these organisms are subject to public eradication, and are classified as quarantine pests in the word list of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC).
Where Acarus siro is concerned, the ministry is studying whether it is possible to place this organism on the non-quarantine pests list.
(Further developments)
With respect to the ministry's policy of considering the four pests targeted for public eradication, the complainant stated that (1) there are many diverging views within the IPPC concerning the definition and application of public eradication, and (2) it is unacceptable that, in the event that pests are detected, eradication is recommended in the case of domestic plants, but the forcible measures of fumigation or destruction are imposed in the case of imported products, and wished to continue discussing this issue at a bilateral working level meeting on plant quarantine.
The ministry replied that if desired, discussions could be continued at the bilateral working level meetings on plant quarantine scheduled for February 2000.
5. Remarks
The two countries agreed to continue discussion the issue at bilateral working level meetings on plant quarantine.
6. Council member's opinion
In this case, the Council member asked whether requiring fumigation or destruction in the case of imported products but only recommending eradication when domestic products are concerned, in the event that pests are discovered, was not in fact a double standard. To this, the ministry replied that "thorough eradication, under the direction of prefectural authorities, is carried out when pests are found on domestic agricultural products at the cultivation site, and eradication is carried out for both domestic and imported products." Indicating no need for a further reply, the Council member then asked whether it is satisfiable that the use of pesticides to eradicate pests while domestic agricultural products are being grown, and eradication through fumigation or destruction, in the case of post-harvest imports, constituted fair treatment of domestic and foreign products.