The 34th session of the Codex Alimentarius Committee on General Principles (CCGP34) successfully addressed all topics on its agenda. CCGP34 endorsed several proposed key changes to the Procedural Manual of the Codex Alimentarius Commission relating to (a) the guidelines for Codex subsidiary bodies (Committees and Task Forces), (b) inconsistencies in language used in the main sections of the procedural manual, (c) the guide to the procedure for the amendment and revision of Codex standards and related texts, (d) the participation of International Non-Governmental Organizations in the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and (e) the criteria and procedural guidelines for Codex committees and ad hoc intergovernmental task forces working by correspondence. CCGP34 also agreed to continue the discussion on the issue of the review of new work proposals which do not fall within the remit of an active Codex committee and agreed that an updated document would be prepared by the Codex Secretariat, considering proposals and feedback from delegates made at CCGP34. CCGP34 also considered but didn’t agree to start new work on two proposals raised at the meeting: (i) a glossary of terms and definitions used in all Codex standards and related texts and (ii) a guidance for use of “reservations” in Codex.1
See more information available about CCGP34 working documents quoted in this article2, as well as in the official report of the CCGP34 meeting.3 Codex standards, guidelines, codes of practices and related miscellaneous texts quoted in this article are readily and freely available.4
Mr. Jean-Luc Angot, the Chairperson of CCGP34 said: “I welcome the great progress made in the work of the CCGP, particularly with regards to the Procedural Manual. This achievement contributes significantly to the strengthening of multilateralism. I thank all the delegations for their commitment and constructive participation, which took place in an excellent atmosphere.
AGREED CHANGES TO THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION’S PROCEDURAL MANUAL (‘Codex PM’)
Guidelines for subsidiary bodies: review of the procedures laid down in Section 3 of the Codex PM
Section 3 of the Codex PM covers various guidelines to countries hosting and to chairpersons of Codex subsidiary bodies, such as committees, task forces, regional coordinating committees, physical working groups, and electronic working groups. Section 3 also covers guidance to host countries of Codex committees and task forces working by correspondence.
Based on the outcome of the intersessional work led by the USA and co-led by CCGP host country (France) and the discussions held during its plenary session, CCGP34 agreed to forward the proposed changes made to Sections 3.1 to 3.3 to CAC48 for their final adoption and update in the next version of the Codex PM. CCGP34 also requested the Codex Secretariat to propose harmonization of the terminology related to “proposed draft” and “draft” standards in the Codex PM for further consideration at the CCGP35 meeting.
Regarding virtual meeting modalities, and noting the strong interest from Codex members on the use of virtual modalities in convening Codex meetings, CCGP34 recommended to CAC48 to further consider the need for clarity and transparency on the interpretation of current procedures and practices. While recognizing the complexities and challenges of revising and interpreting the Codex PM in relation to virtual meetings, CCGP34 noted the importance of inclusiveness in these future discussions (such as the CCGP) and the willingness of Uruguay, Côte d’Ivoire, El Salvador, Senegal, and the USA to prepare a discussion paper on virtual meetings for further consideration by CAC.
Regarding the Sections specific to Physical Working Groups (3.5) and Electronic Working Groups (3.6), CCGP34 agreed to continue their review at CCGP35 based on the outcome of the work of a new EWG led by the USA and co-led by Spain and Panama, to use the discussion held during CCGP34 to align further current Sections 3.5 and 3.6 of the Codex PM with current practices and covering all working modalities.5
Review of inconsistencies in language and superseded content
Based on the working document prepared by the Codex Secretariat containing two appendices (one presenting all superseded sections of the Codex Procedural Manual with commentary and proposed follow-up actions, and one with detailed editorial changes recently made to – or planned for – subsequent editions of the Codex PM), CCGP34 agreed to forward the proposed changes to Sections 2.1, 2.11, 6.1 and 7.2 of the Codex PM to CAC48 for adoption, while noting the editorial updates presented in Appendix II of the CCGP34 working document. CCGP34 also noted New Zealand and USA proposed support to prepare a discussion paper to address whether the references to the International Dairy Federation (IDF) in the Step 2 of the uniform procedure for the elaboration of Codex standards and related texts are still relevant. CCGP34 also requested the Codex Secretariat to harmonize references to standards (and related texts) throughout the Codex PM and to ensure that the link to the membership of CAC was more visible in Section 6. CCGP34 also agreed to forward the comments received in response to the circular letter ‘CL’ (CL 2024/27-GP) on Section 4.8 “Risk analysis principles applied by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues” to the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR) for its consideration.6
Updates of the Guide to the procedure for the amendment and revision of Codex standards and related texts
CCGP34 agreed to forward to CAC48 for adoption the proposed amendments to paragraph 8, paragraph 12 and Part 7 of the Section 2.1 relating to Procedures for the elaboration of Codex standards and related texts.7 CCGP34 also agreed to suggest to CCEXEC to monitor the application of part 7 of Section 2.1 of the Codex PM in the critical review process, and if needed request CAC to refer the issue back to CCGP for further consideration.
CCGP34 considered the working document prepared by the Codex secretariat based on the discussion already held at its previous meeting (CCGP33) that identified the need for clearer definitions on some terminology used to describe a revision, an amendment, a correction, as well as to improve workflows, enhance transparency of updates, and ensure a better common understanding of the control of the appropriate version “in force”. The proposed approaches aimed at being pragmatic and not disturb established practices. Some recent examples served as a basis for the discussion (e.g., correction to a technical value of the composition of some named vegetable oils (in CXS 210) due to a wrong transcription; amendment to the standard on canned sardines and sardine-type products (CXS 94) due to the evolution of the taxonomic name of fish species).
Amendment Relating to The Participation of International Non-Governmental Organizations in the Work of The Codex Alimentarius Commission
CCGP34 agreed to put forward a newly added subheading “Relations between INGOs holding observer status with Codex” between paragraphs 23 and 24 of the current Principles concerning the participation of iNGOs in the work of the CAC in the 30th edition of the Codex Procedural Manual to CAC48 for final adoption. The proposed change was intended to ensure that this double representation clause, already endorsed by CCEXEC86, would apply to any iNGO having “status with FAO” and/or “in official relations with WHO”8 CCGP34 also requested the Codex Secretariat to consider, in collaboration with the legal offices of FAO and WHO, the proposals for further amendments of the double representation clause, and present their review for consideration by a future session of the CCGP.
Review of the application of the Criteria and Procedural guidelines for Codex committees and ad hoc intergovernmental task forces working by correspondence
CCGP34 agreed to forward for adoption by CAC48 the proposed changes to Section 3.4 of the Codex Procedural Manual, “Criteria and procedural guidelines for Codex committees and ad hoc intergovernmental task forces working by correspondence”. CCGP34 also recommended that the CAC provide a clear statement of tasks and timeframe when assigning work to be conducted by correspondence. CCGP34 recalled the importance of transparency regarding reporting on the absence of a quorum at a session of subsidiary bodies of Codex and recommended drawing the attention of CAC to this matter. The item was introduced by the Codex Secretariat with references to previous discussions held at the 31st and 32nd meetings of the CCGP on a procedural guidance for committees working by correspondence (CWBC). The Codex Secretariat shared the main aspects of their analysis presented in the working document, including several proposals for amending Section 3.4 of the Codex PM. One of the main changes related to the CWBC sessions (whereby the registered participants could contribute to the session discussions during a certain period of time by correspondence), the Chairperson (of that session), in consultation with the Codex Secretariat, may exceptionally propose that a specific issue be discussed by simultaneous virtual presence of (registered) participants if deemed necessary for the efficient conclusion of the item. The other significant amendment was the addition of a new paragraph to reinforce that a CWBC would address only the task(s) assigned by the CAC. These two proposals were adopted by CCGP34, among others.9
OTHER ISSUES OF INTEREST
Review of the potential use of existing provisions to promote more resource efficient practices in the review of new work proposals which do not fall within the remit of an active Codex committee
CCGP34 noted that the existing provisions of the Codex PM could promote resource-efficient practices in the review of new work proposals, including those for which there may not be a relevant existing or active committee to undertake such a technical review. CCGP34 also noted the importance of Circular Letters (CLs) as a mean for gathering views of Members and Observers on new work proposals. As such, CCGP34 recommended to continue the discussion on this issue based upon an updated document which would be prepared by the Codex Secretariat, taking into account proposals and feedback from delegates made at CCGP34.
CCGP34 discussed the working document prepared by the Codex secretariat aimed at making optimal use of existing structures in an increasingly resource-constrained environment. The CCEXEC87 had taken the position that for proposals for new work falling within the terms of reference of a committee adjourned sine die, consultations of Members and Observers on the need for such a new work as well as to ease technical discussions on the content of such new work proposal, should be done in an inclusive, timely and resource-efficient way. It was also confirmed that the use of the existing provisions of the Codex PM could promote resource-efficient practices in the review of new work proposals, including those for which there may not be a relevant existing or active committee that might undertake their technical review. Circular Letters had been a useful way to gauge interest in new work proposals falling outside the remit of an active committee. However, a CL only seeks views, it does not provide the possibility for technical exchange and dialogue.10
Proposal for a unique Codex glossary of terms
United Kingdom (UK) introduced its proposal of a Codex glossary (contained in CCGP34 CRD03), foreseen as a centralized resource accessible to all Codex stakeholders and intended to enhance the accessibility of Codex standards and amplify their impact. The new work would start with a simple collation exercise and would not re-open any conversation around the existing definitions, to be consolidated by the Codex Secretariat and the host country secretariat and published as a living information document (noting that multiple definitions of the same term could be included in such a document, based on the various contexts where such a term may be used in Codex texts). Although the potential value of such a centralized glossary resource was recognized, CCGP34 expressed the need for more discussion to clarify the scope of the UK proposal. In particular, concerns regarding the resources required were expressed, in particular the additional work for the Codex Secretariat. It was noted that confusion could be created, should a term used in a specific text be applied in a different context. The possible use of technology to undertake this work, including artificial intelligence, was suggested. CCGP34 agreed to continue the conversation around this proposal informally between the Codex Secretariat and interested Members to explore the scope and its potential benefit. The UK indicated its willingness to continue discussing the potential way forward of this proposal with the Codex Secretariat.
Use of “reservations” in Codex proceedings
Oman introduced a proposal for new work, prepared in collaboration with Egypt and Tunisia (contained in CCGP34 CRD20), to address the definition and application of « reservations », as recorded in Codex meeting reports. The proposal aimed at initiating a dialogue among Codex Members on improving guidance for reservations and to enhance their clarity, consistency, and transparency. Noting that more time was needed to review the document, it was proposed to defer further discussion. It was also proposed that the Codex Secretariat could include information on the use of reservations in their capacity-building training on the application of working procedures within Codex committees, tailored for different participants, including for the Chairpersons of Codex subsidiary bodies. This approach would foster a more uniform understanding across such Codex bodies, mitigating the need for extensive procedural review. The Codex Secretariat also recalled that previous discussions on reservations, documented in Codex archives, provided extensive details on their use and interpretation, and it encouraged Members to review such Codex archives to gain further insights into these past practices. CCGP34 agreed that initial discussions on the use of reservations could be held informally, among Codex Committee Chairpersons to exchange experiences before discussing the issue within the CCGP.
Endnotes