- Print Friendly - Help

Introduction to Codex

Updated 24 August 2009

Codex in relation to other international organisations

This diagram shows the relationships between Codex and other international organisations. Many international bodies feed into Codex.

Relationship between Codex and New Zealand’s other international obligations

The establishment of FSANZ, which has responsibility for developing food standards for both Australia and New Zealand, raises a number of issues relating to trans-Tasman co-ordination and operational relationships. At present, the two countries have no particular requirement to consult with each other on Codex issues. In practice however, they have had close co-operation on a wide range of Codex issues, and have worked closely in the Commission and in the Executive Committee.

Click on logo to visit the FSANZ website

Quadrilateral Group (Quads)

This group is made up of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. Where interests are shared among the Quads group, these are supported by Quads members at Codex sessions.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

The OECD has 29 member countries, including New Zealand. It provides a setting in which to discuss and develop economic and social policy, and discuss the impact of national policies on the international market. International food safety and trade are areas in which the OECD has an influence on Codex and vice versa. As New Zealand is a member of both the OECD and the CAC, it is important that the views we adopt at meetings of either organization are consistent with each other and promote the best interests of New Zealand.

Click on logo to visit the OECD website

World Trade Organization (WTO)

The World Trade Organization is the only global international organization dealing with rules of trade between nations. Its main function is to ensure that trade flows as smoothly, predictably and freely as possible.

Member countries negotiate to establish agreements to lower trade barriers within the multilateral trading system.

Click here to visit the WTO website

Codex and the Uruguay Round Agreements

After the Uruguay Round of World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations in 1994, several important international agreements were established. These provide for groups of WTO member countries to enter into trade agreements among themselves for the purpose of liberalising trade. These agreements represent a milestone in the multilateral trading system because, for the first time, agriculture and food were incorporated under operationally effective rules and disciplines.

Member countries recognised in their negotiations that national governments were using strict measures to discriminate against imports and disguise barriers to trade. Of the resulting agreements that were established, two are of particular importance to New Zealand and Codex: the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) and the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreements.

Both the SPS and TBT Agreements acknowledge the importance of harmonising (providing consistency) standards internationally to eliminate barriers to trade.

Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) applies to all measures that countries put in place to protect their human, animal and plant life or health, and which may directly or indirectly affect international trade. Essentially, SPS measures are food safety and animal and plant quarantine measures.

This agreement acknowledges that national governments have the right to take sanitary and phytosanitary measures necessary for the protection of human health, but only to the extent required to protect human health. It does not permit member countries to apply different requirements to different countries where similar condition apply, unless there is scientific justification to do so.

The SPS Agreement designates the standards, guidelines and recommendations established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission as the benchmarks against which national measures and regulations are evaluated, in the areas of:

• food additives,

• veterinary drugs and pesticide residues,

• contaminants,

• methods of analysis and sampling, and

• codes and guidelines of hygienic practice.

This means that Codex standards are considered scientifically justified and are accepted as international yardsticks.

Click here to access the NZ SPS contact point

The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)

This agreements documents member states' commitment not to create unnecessary obstacles to trade with technical regulations and standards, including packaging, marking and labelling requirements, and analytical procedures for assessing conformity with technical regulations and standards.

Codex standards also assume an important part in the Technical Regulations and Standards provisions contained in Article 2 of the TBT Agreement.

The role of science in Codex

In recent years, Codex member countries have been debating the role of science in the Codex standards setting process. The debate was closely tied to the outcome of the Uruguay Round of WTO negotiations. The SPS Agreement attaches great importance to science as a basis for standard setting.

The emphasis on international harmonisation and the encouragement of countries to use international standards, where these exist, has focused attention on the whole process of international standards development. Codex has sought to do this through the enunciation of the Statements of Principle that recognise the role of science in Codex decision making and the extent to which other relevant factors are taken into account in the development process.

The key principle is that Codex standards must be well founded in sound science and Codex processes should be rigorous and transparent. Countries are, of course, free to accept or not accept a particular Codex standard for whatever reason(s), but they have to recognise that their position will be subject to challenge.

At the 24th CAC Session, the Commission agreed to take the following position:

"When there is evidence that a risk to human health exists but scientific data are insufficient or incomplete, the Commission should not proceed to elaborate a standard but should consider elaborating a related text, such as a code of practice that such a text would be supported by the available scientific evidence."

Risk Analysis

Over the past decade Codex has been concerned with developing guidelines on risk analysis for consistent application across all committees, notably with the promulgation of general principles for risk analysis and also with a specific focus for work such as the development of Nutritional Risk Analysis Principles and Guidelines for Application to the Work of the Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses. The focus on sound scientific evidence and principles as a fundamental basis for the development of Codex guidance continues to be an enduring cornerstone for the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Effort also focuses on clarifying the methodology and application of risk analysis principles to biological risk situations.

Guidelines are under development for risk analysis and the separation of the processes of risk assessment from the risk management functions of various Codex technical committees, such as the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Joint Meeting of Experts on Pesticides Residues (JMPR). This is considered essential to promoting greater acceptance and use of Codex standards. Codex is also moving to make the technical evaluation processes of JECFA and JMPR more transparent.

The SPS Agreement requires countries to determine national measures on the basis of risk assessment. Similarly, Codex is required to apply the principles of risk analysis to its standards setting and decision making processes. This is critical to promoting greater acceptance and use of Codex standards both for domestic application and international trade. Codex is currently engaged in developing guidelines on risk analysis for consistent application across all its committees.

The New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) has developed a specific risk management framework for the food sector which details the four tenets of risk analysis. These are preliminary risk management activities, identification and selection of risk management options, implementation of control measures and monitoring and review.

Codex standards development processes

There are two processes for development of Codex standards: normal and accelerated.

Uniform Procedure For The Elaboration Of Codex Standards And Related Texts

Uniform Accelerated Procedure For The Elaboration Of Codex Standards And Related Texts

Uniform Procedure For The Elaboration Of Codex Standards And Related Texts

Steps 1, 2 and 3

1

The Commission decides, taking into account the outcome of the critical review conducted by the Executive Committee, to elaborate a World-wide Codex Standard and also decides which subsidiary body or other body should undertake the work. A decision to elaborate a World-wide Codex Standard may also be taken by subsidiary bodies of the Commission in accordance with the above mentioned outcome, subject to subsequent approval by the Commission at the earliest possible opportunity. In the case of Codex Regional Standards, the Commission shall base its decision on the proposal of the majority of Members belonging to a given region or group of countries submitted at a session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

2

The Secretariat arranges for the preparation of a proposed draft standard. In the case of Maximum Limits for Residues of Pesticides or Veterinary Drugs, the Secretariat distributes the recommendations for maximum limits, when available from the Joint Meetings of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Core Assessment Group on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), or the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). Any other relevant information regarding risk assessment work conducted by FAO and WHO should also be made available. In the cases of milk and milk products or individual standards for cheeses, the Secretariat distributes the recommendations of the International Dairy Federation (IDF).

3

The proposed draft standard is sent to Members of the Commission and interested international organisations for comment on all aspects including possible implications of the proposed draft standard for their economic interests.

Step 4

The comments received are sent by the Secretariat to the subsidiary body or other body concerned which has the power to consider such comments and to amend the proposed draft standard

Step 5

The proposed draft standard is submitted through the Secretariat to the Executive Committee for critical review and to the Commission with a view to its adoption as a draft standard. In taking any decision at this step, the Commission will give due consideration to the outcome of the critical review and to any comments that may be submitted by any of its Members regarding the implications which the proposed draft standard or any provisions thereof may have for their economic interests. In the case of Regional Standards, all Members of the Commission may present their comments, take part in the debate and propose amendments, but only the majority of the Members of the region or group of countries concerned attending the session can decide to amend or adopt the draft. In taking any decisions at this step, the Members of the region or group of countries concerned will give due consideration to any comments that may be submitted by any of the Members of the Commission regarding the implications which the proposed draft standard or any provisions thereof may have for their economic interests.

Step 6

The draft standard is sent by the Secretariat to all Members and interested international organisations for comment on all aspects, including possible implications of the draft standard for their economic interests.

Step 7

The comments received are sent by the Secretariat to the subsidiary body or other body concerned, which has the power to consider such comments and amend the draft standard.

Step 8

The draft standard is submitted through the Secretariat to the Executive Committee for critical review and to the Commission, together with any written proposals received from Members and interested international organisations for amendments at Step 8 with a view to its adoption as a Codex standard. In the case of Regional Standards, all Members and interested international organisations may present their comments, take part in the debate and propose amendments but only the majority of Members of the region or group of countries concerned attending the session can decide to amend and adopt the draft.

Uniform Accelerated Procedure For The Elaboration Of Codex Standards And Related Texts

Steps 1, 2 and 3

1

The Commission, on the basis of a two-thirds majority of votes cast, taking into account the outcome of the critical review conducted by the Executive Committee, shall identify those standards which shall be the subject of an accelerated elaboration process. The identification of such standards may also be made by subsidiary bodies of the Commission, on the basis of a two-thirds majority of votes cast, subject to confirmation at the earliest opportunity by the Commission.

2

The Secretariat arranges for the preparation of a proposed draft standard. In the case of Maximum Limits for Residues of Pesticides or Veterinary Drugs, the Secretariat distributes the recommendations for maximum limits, when available from the Joint Meetings of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Core Assessment Group on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), or the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). Any other relevant information regarding risk assessment work conducted by FAO and WHO should also be made available. In the cases of milk and milk products or individual standards for cheeses, the Secretariat distributes the recommendations of the International Dairy Federation (IDF).

3

The proposed draft standard is sent to Members of the Commission and interested international organisations for comment on all aspects including possible implications of the proposed draft standard for their economic interests. When standards are subject to an accelerated procedure, this fact shall be notified to the Members of the Commission and the interested international organisations.

Step 4

The comments received are sent by the Secretariat to the subsidiary body or other body concerned which has the power to consider such comments and to amend the proposed draft standard.

Step 5

In the case of standards identified as being subject to an accelerated elaboration procedure, the draft standard is submitted through the Secretariat to the Executive Commission for critical review and to the Commission, together with any written proposals received from Members and interested international organisations for amendments, with a view to its adoption as a Codex standard. In taking any decision at this step, the Commission will give due consideration to any comments that may be submitted by any of its Members regarding the implications which the proposed draft standard or any provisions thereof may have for their economic interests.

For further information, refer to the Codex Procedural Manual.