LAWS
Article 10112 and Article 11113 of Regulation 510/2006 entrusted responsibilities to member states of the EU to ensure official control and verification of compliance with specifications. The product specifications under this Regulation114 had to be met in order to allow for registration. According to Article 11(1), authorities115 or a control
112 Official Control is covered by Article 10 of Regulation 510/2006. It states that:
‘1. Member States shall designate the competent authority or authorities responsible for controls in respect of the obligations established by this Regulation in conformity with Regulation (EC) No 882/2004.
2. Member States shall ensure that any operator complying with this Regulation is entitled to be covered by a system of official controls.
3. The Commission shall make public the name and address of the authorities and bodies referred to in paragraph 1 or in Article 11 and update it periodically.’
113 Verification of compliance with specifications is covered by Article 11 of Regulation 510/2006. It states that:
‘1. In respect of geographical indications and designations of origin relating to a geographical area within the Community, verification of compliance with the specifications, before placing the product on the market, shall be ensured by:
- one or more competent authorities referred to in Article 10 and/or
- one or more control bodies within the meaning of Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 operating as a product certification body.
The costs of such verification of compliance with the specifications shall be borne by the operators subject to those controls.
2. In respect of the geographical indications and designations of origin relating to a geographical area in a third country, verification of compliance with the specifications, before placing the product on the market, shall be ensured by:
- one or more public authorities designated by the third country and/or - one or more product certification bodies.
3. The product certification bodies referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall comply with and, from 1 May 2010, be accredited in accordance with European standard EN 45011 or ISO/IEC Guide 65 (General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems).
4. Where, the authorities referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, have chosen to verify compliance with the specifications, they shall offer adequate guarantees of objectivity and impartiality, and have at their disposal the qualified staff and resources necessary to carry out their functions.’
114 Moreover, details were given in Regulation 1898/2006 laying down the rules for the implementation of
Regulation 510/2006. See Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2006 of 14 December 2006 which laid down detailed rules of implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs [2006]
OJ L369/1
<http://ec.europa.eu/translation/swedish/guidelines/documents/agri_geographical_indications_origin_e n.pdf> accessed 25 August 2014.
115 Referred in Article 10 of Regulation 510/2006. ‘For example in the case of Parma Ham, the authority which oversees producers’ compliance with the required standards of manufacture is an association of producer representatives, by Italian law, the Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma. The Consorzio or association that manages the PDO is responsible for ensuring the quality of their product by monitoring the use of the name in trade and, if necessary, informing the authorities of unauthorised use or practice.’ Evans (n 38) 24.
177
body, as defined in Article 2116 of Regulation 882/2004,117 should ensure that control of compliance with product specifications are met before products are placed on the market as referred to in Article 10 of Regulation 510/2006. Further, according to Article 11(4) of Regulation 510/2006, authorities verifying compliance with the specifications
‘shall offer adequate guarantees of objectivity and impartiality, and have at their disposal the qualified staff and resources necessary to carry out their functions’.
Moreover, the costs of such verification of compliance with the specifications are borne by the operators subject to those controls.118
The obligation to establish and maintain systems for inspection and compliance rested with the national authorities under the repealed EU Regulation 510/2006. Nevertheless,
‘due to the lack of a supervisory authority at the EU level’ problems arose ‘with the quality and inadequate guarantees of objectivity with regard to inspection procedures’.119
According to Recital 46 of 1511/2012, the added value of the geographical indications is based on consumer trust. It is only credible if it is accompanied by effective verification and controls.120 Title V of Regulation deals with ‘Common Provisions’. Its chapter 1 is devoted to ‘official controls for protected designations of origin, protected geographical indications and traditional specialities guaranteed’. Articles 35 to 40
116 Article 2 of EU Regulation 882/2004 provides a definition of a competent authority as ‘the central authority of a Member State competent for the organisation of official controls or any other authority to which that competence has been conferred’.
117 See Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules [2004] OJ L165/1. Article 2 of Regulation 882/2004 defines a control body as an independent third party to which the competent authority has delegated certain control tasks.
118 EU Regulation 510/2006, Article 11(1).
119 See Evans (n 7) 9.
120 See 1511/2012, Recital 46. The duty to establish controls is the responsibility of the national competent authorities in consonance with Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 for the control of geographical indications.
178
comprehensively deal with the official controls of GIs.121 These Articles are more inclusive than the ones provided under the repealed Regulation 510/2006 as they provide ‘minimum common rules on official controls to ensure a product follows the specification and to ensure correct labelling in the marketplace are also laid down’.122 The GI products which are consistent with general EU controls with respect to the monitoring of animal health, animal feed and food law are made subject to monitoring and control by Regulation 1511/2012 at each stage of processing, production and distribution.123 Further, Regulation 1511/2012 improved the compliance with EU controls by referencing that ‘the most relevant articles are incorporated in the Single Regulation;124 in addition, the legislators intend for competent authorities to meet certain operational criteria in order to ensure their objectivity and effectiveness;125 that international standards are used for the operation and accreditation of the control bodies’.126127
The ex officio system of inspection in the EU is not present in the Indian sui generis law. However, under the Rules of the Indian GI Act 1999 different particulars have to be submitted with the application, such as ‘the mechanism to ensure that the standards, quality, integrity and consistency or other special characteristic in respect of the goods to which the geographical indication relates, which are maintained by the producers, maker or manufacturers of the goods, as the case may be’.128 In the case of India, most
121 These Articles also deal with the official control of TSGs but that is not under consideration in this thesis.
122 See Evans (n 7) 9.
123 See Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules, including a system of checks at all stages of production, processing and distribution”.
124 See Regulation 1511/2012, Recital 46.
125 See ibid Recital 48.
126 See ibid Recital 49.
127 See Evans (n 7) 9.
128 Rule 32(1): Text of The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Rules,
179
of the GIs are registered by state institutions and they have their internal mechanism for carrying out verification of specification and ensuring quality control. According to the Tea Board of India:
[It] administers and regulates, under an elaborate system of control, all stages of cultivation, processing, promotion and sale of Darjeeling tea, including both domestic sales and exports of the teas to overseas markets … all of the 87 tea gardens are registered with the Tea Board and that the Tea Board regularly monitors these gardens by making periodic checks and inspections.129
Control is very important to establish compliance with specifications because otherwise there is a fear of rendering the GIs generic.130 The private sector in Pakistan has neither the capacity nor the finances to effectively implement this system.131 According to the former Chairman of the REAP:
As in the case of India, it will be in the interest of Pakistan to use its State institutions to register and protect GIs. Government can emulate the best practices as provided by EU law however the government should bear the main burden of cost with the private sector to do verifications of specifications to ensure quality and authenticity of its products. Further it will be difficult for small scale farmers to contribute hence there should not be burdened with regard to any cost.132