Non-Tariff Barriers :: Complaints

Resolved complaints

Showing items 421 to 440 of 800

Complaint number	NTB Type Category 1. Government participation in trade & restrictive practices tolerated by governments 1.1. Export subsidies 1.2. Government monopoly in export/import 1.3. State subsidies, procurement, trading, state ownership 1.4. Preference given to domestic bidders/suppliers 1.5. Requirement for counter trade 1.6. Domestic assistance programmes for companies 1.7. Discriminatory or flawed government procurement policies 1.8. Import bans 1.9. Determination of eligibility of an exporting country by the importing country 1.10. Determination of eligibility of an exporting establishment (firm, company) by the importing country 1.11. Occupational safety and health regulation 1.12. Multiplicity and Controls of Foreign exchange market 1.13. "Buy national" policy 1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions 1.15. Other Category 2. Customs and administrative entry procedures 2.1. Government imposing antidumping duties 2.2. Arbitrary customs classification 2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin 2.4. Import licensing 2.5. Decreed customs surcharges 2.6. Additional taxes and other charges 2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures 2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures 2.9. Issues related to transit fees 2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges 2.11. Lack of control in Customs infrastructure 2.12. Lack of capacity of Customs officers 2.13. Issues related to Pre-Shipment Inspections 2.14. Other Category 3. Technical barriers to trade (TBT) Category 4. Sanitary & phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures Category 5. Specific limitations 5.1. Quantitative restrictions 5.2. Exchange controls 5.3. Export taxes 5.4. Quotas 5.5. Import licensing requirements 5.6. Proportion restrictions of foreign to domestic goods (local content requirement) 5.7. Minimum import price limits 5.8. Embargoes 5.9. Non-automatic licensing 5.10. Prohibitions 5.11. Quantitative safeguard measures 5.12. Export restraint arrangements 5.13. Other quantity control measures 5.14. Restrictive licenses 5.15. Other Category 6. Charges on imports 6.1. Prior import deposits and subsidies 6.2. Administrative fees 6.3. Special supplementary duties 6.4. Import credit discriminations 6.5. Variable levies 6.6. Border taxes 6.7. Other Category 7. Other procedural problems 7.1. Arbitrariness 7.2. Discrimination 7.3. Corruption 7.4. Costly procedures 7.5. Lengthy procedures 7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) 7.7. Complex variety of documentation required 7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues 7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure 7.10. Other Category 8. Transport, Clearing and Forwarding 8.1. Government Policy and regulations 8.2. Administrative (Border Operating Hours, delays at border posts, etc.) 8.3. Immigration requirements (Visa, travel permit) 8.4. Transport related corruption 8.5. Infrastructure (Air, Port, Rail, Road, Border Posts,) 8.6. Vehicle standards 8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees 8.8. Issues related to transit Other Policy or Regulatory NTB Not a policy or regulatory NTB Check allUncheck all	Date of incident	Location COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Reporting country or region (additional) COMESA Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Eswatini Ethiopia Kenya Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Rwanda Seychelles Somalia Sudan Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe EAC Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Kenya Rwanda South Sudan Tanzania Uganda SADC Angola Botswana Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Eswatini Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe COMESA EAC SADC	Status	Actions
NTB-000-512	8.6. Vehicle standards	2012-06-01	Tanzania: Tunduma	South Africa	Resolved 2013-04-10	View
Complaint:	While the SADC and most EAC countries as well as most international countries allow a vehicle length (semi truck and trailer) of 18,5 M Tanzania only allows 17,5M. This is, in itself, not really a problem, and we are willing to buy permits in order to comply with that country's rules. However the only way you can obtain a permit is to arrive at Tunduma border post (or any border post ) then you have to pay someone to catch a bus for about 900 Kms and apply in Dar es Salaam. This can take days and then to aggravate the situation, the permits will only be issued on a Thursday, then the runner has to catch a bus all the way back to the border post in unreliable busses etc. It only took two days to clear the transit goods into Tanzania for transit into Kenya, however we have had to wait approximately ten days just to get a permit for being the normal SADC length of vehicle. We are carrying UN goods and we have now missed the deadline for the goods to be loaded onto the ship in Mombasa. It is entirely unacceptable that Thousands of Dollars of time and money are now lost due to such a rule that the rest of world has moved past. Also if Tanzania wishes to continue to collect revenue for permits then is it not an easier solution for them to have an office at the border (possibly VID) that can issue a permit and allow goods to move in due time. At the very least could Tanroads, or the Ministry not simply allow pre purchase or order of the permits via internet and let VID issue and check the vehicle dimensions at the border? Why does this have to be such a difficult and time consuming issue that slows down trade into and across Tanzania's borders
Resolution status note:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool held from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, Tanzania had consultations with South Africa and agreed it was a one off incident and if any issues arise they should contact Tanroad office at the Tunduma Border.
NTB-000-544	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2012-06-01	Zimbabwe: Chirundu	Zimbabwe	Resolved 2013-06-13	View
Complaint:	Customs Manager Churundu, Zimbabwe, he is not giving Value to STR Simplified Trade Regime under Comesa, all congnments with a $1000 value, though it is the value threshold he is revaluing the goods in order to exceed $1000 so that the trader will will not have the benefit of not paying duty, thereby confusing traders and prejudicing them of their priviledges and rights given to then by the gorvnment of not paying duty if they buy products on the List of Eligible products
Resolution status note:	On 1st June 2013, ZImbabwe Revenue Authority explained that the price paid or payable which is the transaction value is normally used to arrive at the value for duty purposes. For STR consignments where the transport and insurance has not been proved the value will be uplifted by 6% as the value for duty purposes in Zimbabwe is on a Cost, Insurance and Freight Basis.There is never an intention by Chirundu or any ZIMRA Office to deny importers their right to clear goods under STR where the goods are properly declared. Where the goods are not properly declared the offices may be forced to resort to revaluation. It should borne in mind that value of goods under STR are generally predictable as the suppliers are few, known and their range of prices can be common. Zimbabwe Revenue Authority further observed that, this complaint is too general and is not pointing to a particular incident. Should they have a specific query, the complainant is encouraged to make a write up to the Commissioner General of the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority so that investigations are carried out and the query responded to. In the spirit of transparency the complainant is also advised to raise any issues with the Regional Manager responsible for Chirundu who is based at Kurima House in Harare. In the absence of specific reference to affected product or incidence, this complaint will be considered resolved on the basis of the explanations above.
NTB-000-519	8.8. Issues related to transit	2012-06-20	Tanzania: Dar-es-Salaam Port	Burundi	Resolved 2013-10-17	View
Complaint:	Payment of double handling charges at the ICDs and at the Dar es Salaam port.
Resolution status note:	At the 12th Regional Forum on NTBs held from 14th – 17th, October 2013, at EAC Headquarters, Arusha, Tanzania, United Republic of Tanzania (URT) reported that the ICD charges are part of port charges and are therefore not additional charges. The only additional charges are on demurrage. However, Burundi requested to re-submit documentation supporting their submission through the EAC Secretariat. In the meantime, URT to investigate further and revert at the next EAC Regional Forum on NTBs in September, 2013. The meeting agreed to resolve this NTB on the basis of URT submission.
NTB-000-520	6.5. Variable levies Policy/Regulatory	2012-06-20	Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority	Kenya	Resolved 2018-11-16	View
Complaint:	Beef and Pork from Kenya Farmers Choice are being charged 25% by Tanzania because the company is in the duty remission scheme despite the products not benefiting from the duty remission scheme.
Resolution status note:	During SCTIFI meeting held on 16 November2018, Kenya reported that the NTB was resolved
NTB-000-521	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2012-06-20	Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority	Kenya	Resolved 2013-04-10	View
Complaint:	TRA rejects EAC certificates of origin . Tanzania Revenue Authority imposes a duty of 25% of EABL products exported to its subsidiary Serengeti breweries limited in Tanzania
Resolution status note:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool held from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, Tanzania reported that certificates of origin are now issued for all EAC products both ion the STR and normal exports.
NTB-000-522	2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin	2012-06-20	Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority	Kenya	Resolved 2013-04-10	View
Complaint:	Non recognition of EAC certificate of origin by Tanzania Revenue Athority for furniture products manufactured in Kenya
Resolution status note:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool held from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, Zambia, Tanzania reported that this was a one off incidence which had been resolved.
NTB-000-515	8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees	2012-06-27	Zambia: Kazungula Ferry	South Africa	Resolved 2016-09-07	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. Transporters are being charged a motor vehicle fee by Siavonga Municipal Council. There is no justification for such a fee since the transporters do not receive any services from the Council. The transporters are travelling on national roads, which are maintained by the government and not the Council. The transporters pay road user charges to the government to maintain the roads. Please refer to NTB 480
Resolution status note:	Zambia advised that all Levies collected by the Council are guided by Section 69 and 70 of the Local Government Act CAP 281 of the Laws of Zambia which specifies the Levies to be collected. Under this Act (CAP 281), no Council is mandated to collect motor vehicle fees. The measure shall be uploaded onto the online NTMs database .
NTB-000-516	2.9. Issues related to transit fees	2012-07-01	Eswatini: Ngwenya	Mozambique	Resolved 2013-06-10	View
Complaint:	My family and I were requested to pay an "alledged" import duty for groceries valued at around 800 Rands even though we clearly stated that we were in transit travelling from South Africa to Mozambique. The customs official kept insisting that we would be given a receipt and to our amazement the receipt had my husband's name but instead of his addressing being Maputo it was registered Manzini. Would the Swazi focal point(s) please clarify if this is the usual procedure for goods transiting Swazilang, whether commercial or for personal consumption
Resolution status note:	On 10 June 2013, Swaziland Focal Point reported that the matter had been settled with the complainant after all information supplied was verified with Swaziland Revenue authority requirements for th eimportation of personal goods.
NTB-000-518	8.8. Issues related to transit	2012-07-09	South Africa: Durban sea Port	South Africa	Resolved 2016-10-07	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. The South African Cross-Border Road Transport Agency is wanting to fine trucks for not having road transport permits for the complete trip from Durban to the DRC. In terms of the bi-lateral transport agreement between Zimbabwe and South Africa, Zimbabwe had issued a permit to a transporter for the Durban-Zimbabwe leg of the trip. Zimbabwe could not issue a bi-lateral permit all the way to DRC because there is no bi-lateral transport agreement between Zimbabwe and DRC. Both Zimbabwe and DRC are members of COMESA and therefore Zimbabwe was able to issue a COMESA PTA Carriers Licence to the transporter, to operate between Zimbabwe and the DRC. Thus, effectively, the transporter had permits to cover the complete trip from Durban to DRC. The fact that neither the CBRTA nor Zimbabwe could issue a single permit for the full trip, was not the fault of the transporter. The CBRTA should be facilitating trade between the three countries and not be trying to find any opportunity to fine transporters.
Resolution status note:	FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present.
NTB-000-517	8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees Policy/Regulatory	2012-07-16	Democratic Republic of the Congo: KIPUS Mine	Tanzania	Resolved 2012-07-20	View
Complaint:	Tanzania Truck Owners Association (TATOA) reported that Tanzania Trucks, after delivering a consignment they carried from Tanzania to Congo, are charged $100,000/= per truck if they want to carry another consignment on their way back to Dar es Salaam. The attached receipt is just evidence for one transaction but there are other transporters who have paid such charges while there are also other transporters whose vehicles have been detained until now. This fee is charged at KIPUS mine in the name of LOCAL INCOME TAX WHILE LOADING CARGO. Tanzania regards this as an NTB and she needs to know the reason for charging such a huge amount of money from transporters. DRC focal point is requested to treat this matter as urgent since a number of tracks are still detained at Kipus Mine in the D. R. Congo.
Resolution status note:	On 08 October, Tanzania focal point reported that the DRC released the trucks held at the KIPUS Mine . This NTB is therefore considered resolved.
NTB-000-523	7.1. Arbitrariness	2012-08-06	Democratic Republic of the Congo: On all roads	South Africa	Resolved 2012-12-03	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. the traffic police and other authorities in DRC, are enforcing a 40km/hr speed limit on all roads. If the speed is exceeded, a spot fine of US$500 is imposed. If the truck is impounded, a further US$100 per day is charged for parking. This is an unacceptable acitivity, since the normal speed limits are clearly marked with road signs. 40km/hr throughout the country is not a realistic speed limit.
Resolution status note:	On 02 December 2012, the Department of Transport in the DRC advised that an agreement between the drivers and the DRC government was reached that , until 30 January 2013, there will be no speed limits imposed. The DRC government will look at the drivers behaviour and will come back with a final solution to this issue after 30 January 2013.
NTB-000-524	8.1. Government Policy and regulations	2012-08-06	Zimbabwe: At road blocks	South Africa	Resolved 2013-09-13	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. The Zimbabwe road traffic authorities are enforcing vehicle equipment regulations that pertain only to their own country and are not harmonized with other countries. An example of this is for a truck to display its tare and gross mass on the exterior of the vehicle, in numbers and letters of a particular size. This requirement is not the same as for other countries. The Zimbabwe authorities should accept the certificates of roadworthiness from other countries. Zimbabwe should not harass drivers for such issues.
Resolution status note:	On 13 September 2013, FESARTA reported that they had subsequently received a letter from the Ministry of Transport, Communications and Infrastructural Development, directed to the Zimbabwe Republic Police, instructing the police to accept the standards of South African vehicles. FESARTA believes that this letter will also indirectly apply to vehicles from countries other than South Africa entering Zimbabwe. Therefore, FESARTA recommends that NTBs 524 and 563 be considered resolved.
NTB-000-529	1.8. Import bans	2012-08-08	Burundi: National Police	Rwanda	Resolved 2013-10-16	View
Complaint:	Ban on import of fresh fruits from Burundi to Rwanda
Resolution status note:	On 16 October 2013, Burundi Focal Point reported that, at the 12th EAC Regional Forum on NTBs held on 14th– 17th October, 2013 in Arusha, Tanzania, Rwanda reported that Burundi had lifted the ban. Therefore the NTB was resolved
NTB-000-527	2.6. Additional taxes and other charges	2012-08-20	Zambia: Chirundu	Zimbabwe	Resolved 2013-04-12	View
Complaint:	The 16th Zimbabwe/Zambia Joint Commission held in Masvingo from 23-25 August 2012 learnt that Zambia had introduced a law which compels informal traders from outside that country to pay 1 Million Kwacha for a trading permit. The permit is valid for six months. Zimbabwe viewed the Zambia action as against the principles of the COMESA Simplified Trade Regime (STR) and also constituting an NTB.
Resolution status note:	On 25 September 2012, Zambia Focal point reported that the complaint from Zimbabwe with regard to the introduction of the Cross Border Permit valued at ZMK,000,000 as provided for under the new Immigration laws is valid. In a follow up with Zambia Immigration at Kariba Border post on 12 April 2013, it was reported that the ZMK 1 million was reasonable because the permit is a multi-entry and does not restrict traders to number of days per visit during in the six months validity of the permit. Further, the Focal point reported that Zambia was in the process of reviewing the fee downwards. The signing of the statutory instrument by the Hon. Minister of Home Affairs so as to operationalise the same is still being awaited.
NTB-000-526	1.1. Export subsidies Policy/Regulatory	2012-08-26	Zambia: Chirundu	South Africa	Resolved 2016-10-07	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. The Zambian Ministry of Agriculture has cancelled all export permits and required exporters to apply for an individual permit for each truck. No notice was given. This has resulted in significant delays in that trucks en route have to wait at the border whilst new permits are applied for. In addition, permits are only being issued for up to 30 tons. 56-ton gross combination mass vehicle combinations can load 33 tons and over, meaning a reduction of at least 10% of the load. There is no legal justification for restricting the load to 30 tons, since the road traffic regulations control loads through axle loads, gvm and gcm. Never the load on the vehicle. This will result in an increase in cost to transport the goods.
Resolution status note:	FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present.
NTB-000-528	8.1. Government Policy and regulations Policy/Regulatory	2012-09-10	Zimbabwe: Nyamapanda	Zimbabwe	Resolved 2015-06-10	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. Port Health at Nyamapanda, Zimbabwe, has issued a notice to the effect that all goods transiting the border are to be inspected, from 10th September. The inspection in itself is not a problem. However, a charge is to be levied for this inspection. This is unacceptable. Port Health is a government department, which has a duty to perform, in the course of its daily work. This duty is part of Port Health's daily workload and it budgeted for from Central Government. Health inspections are done in the interests of the country and are not asked for by the transporter. There should be no extra charge for this. What would happen if every government department charged citizens for carrying out their daily duties?
Resolution status note:	During the meeting of COMESA Heads of Customs Sub- Committee held in Nairobi on 19-20 June 2015, Zimbabwe reported that the NTB was an internal control measure and what was required was sensitization of stakeholders on various import and export requirements. This was resolved at the 31st COMESA Trade and Customs Committee meeting held on 7-10 September 2015.
NTB-000-532	8.8. Issues related to transit	2012-09-10	Mozambique: Along the Tete to Calomue/Dedza route, on the North-South Corridor	Mozambique	Resolved 2012-12-18	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. Drivers of trucks that transport fertilizer from Beira to Malawi, are being attacked and killed along the Tete to Calomue route. Then the loads are being taken through the Calomue/Dedza border into Malawi, and sold there. The trucks are then abandoned. Drivers bodies are found by the side of the road days later. The Mozambique transporters are demanding urgent talks with the Sofala Governor, and commander chief of police, to enforce the patrol on the Beira corridor and find the killers. It has happened three times: • A Malawian fuel truck was hijacked and the driver and passenger killed a month ago • Two weeks later, a truck loaded with fertilizer to Malawi, driver killed and load taken to the Malawi border, sold there and truck taken back to Tete bridge and abandoned • Last week another truck with fertilizer was hijacked, driver killed and load taken to uncertain place Satellite tracking has shown that the trucks are hijacked at Angonia village, not far from the Malawi border. This most serious situation has to be dealt with urgently.
Resolution status note:	On 17 Decemebr 2012, Mozambique Focal point reported that the Tax Authority of Mozambique did their due diligence in the central part, which resulted in the arrest of two culprits by the Police Authorities in Tete-Calomué-Dedza region. A detailed report from Mozambique Police authorities is given below : 1. The two arrested culprits (Names provided) have been brought before the courts and are responding criminally for their offences in the Courts of the city of Chimoio and Bárue respectively. 2. Investigations carried out by Mozambique Police found that the drivers themselves have created favorable environment for the Commission of such acts, by collaborating with culprits who generally were selling fuel siphoned from vehicles or tanks, and because these businesses cannot be performed often in villages, drivers ended up giving a ride to these people some of whom are criminals to places that they felt safer and then committed the crimes such crimes as charged. 3. Mozambique is therefore urging member states to adhere to regional transit agreements under the COMESA-EAC-SADC, and also urge the institutions or companies that exploit Mozambique highways to instruct their drivers not to collaborate with the criminals on the roads and not get involved in swindling their employers through selling fuel to street vendors on highways where they end up risking their own lives.
NTB-000-533	7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof)	2012-09-24	Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls	Zimbabwe	Resolved 2013-06-30	View
Complaint:	We are importing fuel tankers from South Africa to Zambia. The trailers are SA Registered (Valid licence and Registration Plates - deregistered once in Zambia). The Truck Tractors are from our Zambian Fleet. On arrival at Beit Bridge, the documents are accepted by ZIMRA as trailers being exported to Zambia, drawn on their own wheels, in transit across Zimbabwe to Victoria Falls. The act of exporting the trailers on their own wheels is thus condoned by ZIMRA at Beit Bridge. When we get to Victoria Falls, we are then told by ZIMRA that exported motorised vehicles must be carried on the back of a flat deck trailer. A statutory instrument is eluded to, but we have yet to see this. Our arguement is as follows. The trailers have valid registrations and licences (not to mention all the Police Clearances for export), they are not motorised (self propelled), ZIMRA Beit Bridge has condoned the export on wheels and we are actually presenting ourselves at Vic Falls and have not disappeared with the units illegally into Zimbabwe. Placing these units on flat decks is prohibitively expensive. We are not transporting imported cars from overseas that are deregistered and for which we understand the need to be transported whilst in transit across Zimbabwe on a flat deck etc. There is no clear statutory instrument that we have seen on exports of this nature eg licenced trailers
Resolution status note:	On 30 June 2013, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority reported that the treatment by Beitbridge to allow the trailers on their wheels when transiting through Zimbabwe for re-exports to Zambia was the correct treatment. The legislation on movement of goods in transit through Zimbabwe is in terms of Section 234(3) of the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) which reads "Where the goods in transit concerned are motor vehicles, no such motor vehicle shall be driven on any road in Zimbabwe but shall be transported on a long-haul motor vehicle carrier". This requirement was inserted by Act 3 of 2010 and was with effect from 1 November 2010. The requirement only affects motor vehicles and does not affect trailers as they cannot be driven but are rather pulled by mechanical horses. This interpretation had been discussed with the Station Manager Victoria Falls who shared the same view and assured that there would be no issues raised in this regard on trailers being re-exported to Zambia.
NTB-000-531	8.1. Government Policy and regulations Policy/Regulatory	2012-09-28	Botswana: Kazungula Ferry	Botswana	Resolved 2016-08-15	View
Complaint:	This complaint is registered by FESARTA. Chobe municipality is charging foreign transporters a fee to pass through its area of jurisdiction. There is no justification for any municipality to charge transporters for travelling on the national roads through their areas. The municipalities do not provide services to the transporters and the national roads are maintained by the national roads authorities. This practice was started by Zambian municipalities and was halted by the Zambian government. However, some Zambian municipalities continue to charge. The practice also does not align with the RECs requirement that the transporters should pay road user charges and not other charges.
Resolution status note:	The Focal Point advised that the Chobe Municipality no longer charges foreign transporters the fees.
NTB-000-534	8.4. Transport related corruption	2012-09-30	Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Machipanda (Road)	Zambia	Resolved 2013-04-10	View
Complaint:	On the aforemention date, one of my fuel tankers, was stopped by Mozambique Environmental Officials at the Machipanda border post. The officials advised that they wanted to inspect the fire extinguishers and the driver cooperated by placing the 4 extinguishers at their disposal. The Officials then pulled the pin on all four extinguishers and discharged the powder. They then told the driver that they were satisfied that the extinguishers worked, and he could proceed. You cannot do this to a fire extinguisher. It is not like an aerosol can that keeps its pressure. Once you depress the handle and discharge even a small amount of powder, the fire extinguisher is exhausted and of no further use. Officials can check if the extinguisher is valid on the certificate on the side of the extinguisher and if the site glass indicates pressure in the green. If we need an extinguisher and the officials have discharged it, we are at the mercy of the fire.
Resolution status note:	At the Tripartite NTBs Online Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism Meeting to Launch the SMS Reporting Tool held from 9-10 April 2013 in Lusaka, ZambiaMozambique reported that this was a mistake by officer on duty and this matter has since been corrected and therefore resolved.

<< Previous 1 2 3...20 21 22 23 24...38 39 40 Next >>

Display:

Non-Tariff Barriers

Reporting, Monitoring and Eliminating Mechanism

Resolved complaints