Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

Introduction

Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures are government measures intended to protect human, animal, and plant health from risks arising from diseases, pests, contaminants, and harmful organisms. These measures are especially important in international trade involving food, agricultural products, animals, plants, seeds, and biotechnology-derived products.

Sanitary measures primarily concern human and animal health, while phytosanitary measures focus on plant health. Examples include food-safety testing, animal quarantine, pesticide-residue limits, inspection of imported plants, and restrictions on products that may transmit pests or diseases.

The principal international legal framework is the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, commonly known as the SPS Agreement. It recognises the right of states to protect health while requiring that SPS restrictions be scientifically justified and not operate as arbitrary barriers to trade.

Case Laws

1. EC — Hormones, WTO, DS26 and DS48 (1998)

The European Communities prohibited imports of meat treated with certain growth hormones. The WTO Appellate Body examined the relationship between scientific evidence, risk assessment, and the right to protect human health. The dispute established that SPS measures must be supported by a risk assessment under Article 5.1, although a member may choose its own level of health protection.

Trade and Economic Security+1

2. Australia — Salmon, WTO, DS18 (1998)

Australia restricted imports of salmon to protect against disease risks to its fish population. The WTO found that the measures were not adequately supported by a risk assessment and were more trade-restrictive than necessary in relevant respects. The dispute illustrates that governments should consider whether less restrictive measures can achieve the chosen level of protection.

1995–2020

3. Japan — Agricultural Products II, WTO, DS76 (1999)

Japan required testing for different varieties of certain agricultural products before permitting imports. The WTO found that Japan had not sufficiently demonstrated that its testing requirements were supported by an appropriate risk assessment. The case is relevant to SPS regulations requiring separate testing or approval for different crop varieties.

1995–2020

4. India — Agricultural Products, WTO, DS430 (2015)

The United States challenged India’s restrictions on certain agricultural imports because of avian influenza concerns. The WTO found that India’s measures were inconsistent with several SPS provisions, including requirements concerning risk assessment, international standards, regional disease conditions, and transparency. The Appellate Body modified part of the Panel’s analysis under Article 2.2. India and the United States later notified a mutually agreed solution in March 2024.

DS430+1

Core Principles of the SPS Agreement

The SPS Agreement requires governments to observe several principles:

Scientific justification: Measures should be based on scientific principles and sufficient evidence.

Risk assessment: Article 5.1 requires SPS measures to be based on an assessment of the relevant risks.

International standards: Article 3 encourages harmonisation with standards developed by bodies such as Codex Alimentarius, the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), and the International Plant Protection Convention.

Proportionality: Under Article 5.6, a measure should not be more trade-restrictive than necessary where a reasonably available alternative achieves the government’s chosen level of protection.

Transparency: Article 7 and Annex B require publication and notification of relevant SPS measures.

Precaution: Article 5.7 permits provisional measures where relevant scientific evidence is insufficient, subject to further information gathering and review.

These principles preserve a country’s right to protect health while preventing SPS measures from becoming unjustified barriers to international trade.

APEDA+1

Indian Legal Framework

In India, SPS-related regulation is implemented through legislation and administrative measures including:

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, for food safety.

Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import into India) Order, 2003, for plant and plant-material imports.

Livestock Importation Act, 1898, and related animal-health measures.

Relevant regulations administered by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), plant-quarantine authorities, and animal-health authorities.

The legal measure must be assessed according to its purpose and the relevant statutory authority. A measure intended to address food-borne disease or pest risks may fall within the SPS Agreement, whereas other technical regulations may instead be governed by the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.

APEDA+1

Conclusion

Sanitary and phytosanitary measures are essential for protecting public health, animal health, and plant life. However, they must be scientifically justified, risk-based, transparent, and consistent with international obligations.

The WTO decisions in EC — Hormones, Australia — Salmon, Japan — Agricultural Products II, and India — Agricultural Products demonstrate that governments may adopt strong health protections, but must support them with appropriate risk assessments and avoid unjustified discrimination or excessive trade restrictions. The SPS Agreement therefore balances national health protection with fair and predictable international trade.