| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-277 |
5.3. Export taxes |
2009-09-08 |
Rwanda: Ministry of Trade |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2011-10-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Export levies of 15% is charged on unprocessed goat hides |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Rwanda hs lifted the ban on exportation of raw hides and skins. However, the 5th EAC regional forum on NTBs held from 1-3 Septmber 2011 noted that the ban was appllied by all EAC countries with the aim to encourage value addition on raw hides towards export. |
|
|
NTB-000-196 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin
Policy/Regulatory |
2009-07-27 |
SADC |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2011-11-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Delays in communicating signatories that verify certificates of origin. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
SADC Secretariat reported that,in accordance to rule 9 of Annex I of the SADC Protocol on Trade, “Member States shall deposit with the Secretariat the names of Departments and Agencies authorized to issue the certificates required […],specimen signatures of officials authorized to sign the certificates and the impressions of the official stamps to be used for that purpose, and those shall be circulated to Member States by the Secretariat.” SADC Secretariat circulates all the documentary evidence to Member States immediately upon receipt. In addition, the SADC Customs Unit is working in a user-friendly customs related link in the SADC Secretariat’s website to accommodate not only issues related to documentary evidence for the processing of SADC RoO, but also all the binding documentation that enhances trade in the Region. |
|
|
NTB-000-292 |
2.10. Inadequate or unreasonable customs procedures and charges
Policy/Regulatory |
2009-09-08 |
SADC |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Empty space on trucks cannot be utilized due to the 'Third Country' rules. This law should be abolished within SADC |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
SADC Secretariat reported that, reducing costs of doing business in the region is one of the key objectives of the SADC Secretariat. However, some interventions of the Secretariat are bound by its regional economic integration process. SADC FTA enables goods originating in Member States applying the FTA to enter duty free and quota free under provisions in the SADC Protocol on Trade. For this economic activity, economic operators are not obliged to be registered as economic operators in the countries where goods are delivered if only they are delivering goods. A deeper regional economic integration would be needed in order to allow foreign economic operators to engage in business activities in Member States, benefit from local business opportunities but also meeting fiscal obligations arising from such operations. This is a level of economic integration closer to common market and which forms SADC long term vision. |
|
|
NTB-000-352 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures
Policy/Regulatory |
2010-02-10 |
SADC |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The cabotage law applied by SADC Member states contributes to high transport costs. The law does not allow an empty truck to carry back a load from a third country. For example, a South African truck dropping off a load in Namibia cannot pick up a load in Namibia destined for Botswana even though this truck is using trans Kalahari Highway linking the two countries |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
SADC secretariat responded that : the customs term cabotage as stated in Specific Annex E, Chapter 3 of the revised Kyoto Convention, is applied for imported goods that have not been declared under the condition that they must be transported in a vessel other than the importing vessel in which they arrived in the Customs territory are loaded on board a vessel at a place in the Customs territory and are transported to another place in the same Customs territory where they are then unloaded and cleared. The term can also be used for the same purposes for air transportation (domestic flights).
Looking to the complaint technically, one of the SADC Secretariat key objectives is to reduce the costs of doing business in the region. However, some interventions of the Secretariat are bounded by its regional economic integration process. SADC is currently a FTA among its 11 Member States, enabling goods originating in Member States applying the FTA to enter duty free and quota free under certain conditions stated in the SADC Protocol on Trade. For this economic activity, economic operators are not obliged to be registered as economic operators in the countries were goods are delivered. A deeper regional economic integration would be needed in order to allow foreign economic operators to engage in business activities in Member States, benefiting from local business opportunities but also fiscal obligations. This is a level of economic integration closer to common market and which unfortunately, the SADC Protocol on Trade does not provide for. |
|
|
NTB-000-375 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2010-02-10 |
SADC |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2011-11-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
There is lack of clarity and information on the authorities issuing and processing SADC certificates of origin in Member states. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
SADC secretariat reported that : as stated in rule 9 of the Annex I of the SADC Protocol on Trade, “Member States shall deposit with the Secretariat the names of Departments and Agencies authorized to issue the certificates required […], specimen signatures of officials authorized to sign the certificates and the impressions of the official stamps to be used for that purpose, and those shall be circulated to Member States by the Secretariat.” SADC Secretariat circulates all the documentary evidence to Member States immediately upon reception. Additionally, the SADC Customs Unit is working in a user-friendly customs related link in the SADC Secretariat’s website to accommodate not only issues related to documentary evidence for the process of SADC RoO, but also all the binding documentation that enhances trade in the Region. |
|
|
NTB-000-108 |
7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure |
2009-07-26 |
Angola: Telecommunications Department |
South Africa |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Angola postal and delivery services are unrelaible |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTB workshop held in Luanda on 30 November 2011, Angola reported that postal services have been improved significantly in the last few years. DHL, and other services are now available in post offices. The NTB is therefore resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-244 |
7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues |
2009-09-08 |
Angola: Ministry of Home Affairs |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Processing of visa requirements for business travel and professional staff to enter Angola take long. (10 working days),are costly and rapidly fill the pages of one's passport. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTBs national workshop held in Angola on 30 November 2011, Angola reported that Namibian citizens do not require VISA to Angola. VISAs are processed in a period between 2-10 days. |
|
|
NTB-000-245 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures
Policy/Regulatory |
2009-09-08 |
Angola: Ministry of Trade |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The acquisition of Pre-shipment inspection numbers and consequent inspection of shipments for exports to Angola make transport pre-planning quite difficult and cause lengthy delays for the transport industry. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTBs national workshop held in Angola on 30 November 2011, Angola reported that this NTB lacks clarity and complainant could not be traced to provide additional information. The complaint is therefore considered resolved unless additional information is provided. |
|
|
NTB-000-253 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-09-08 |
Angola: Ondjiva Customs |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Clearance of goods by the Ondjiva customs at the Oshikango/Santa Clara border post is too time consuming (red tape/inefficient bureaucracy). |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTBs national workshop held in Angola on 30 November 2011, Angola reported that its Customs service underwent a structural reform and modernisation resulting in the simplification and harmonisation of customs procedures. Clearance of goods takes maximum 48 hours, if documentation is properly submitted. |
|
|
NTB-000-254 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-09-08 |
Angola: Angola Revenue Authority |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Lack of harmonized procedures between Namibian and Angolan customs authorities make exports into Angola very difficult and generally frustrating. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTBs national workshop held in Angola on 30 November 2011, it was reported that Angola has modernised customs procedures by reducing dwell time to 48 hours. Angola is also developed simplified trade regimes for informal and small scale traders, incorporating them into the trading system. |
|
|
NTB-000-259 |
7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) |
2009-09-08 |
Angola: Ondjiva Customs |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Angola effects random increases in excise duties without notifying traders in advance. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTBs national workshop held in Angola on 30 November 2011, it was reported that all tariffs and other related fees and charges are gazetted and therefore not charged in ad hoc manner. The Angola Tariff Book is published and available on Angola Customs website (www.alfandegas.gv.ao). |
|
|
NTB-000-261 |
7.4. Costly procedures |
2009-09-08 |
Angola: Ondjiva Customs |
Namibia |
Resolved
2011-11-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Extended and unpredictable turnaround time resulting in additional costs of trucking into Angola. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the NTBs national workshop held in Angola on 30 November 2011 it was reported that customs observations were that truck drivers leave trucks at the Angola borders for 3 or more days and return to Oshikango to resolve personal issues, claiming that they are processing documents. Too many trucks are parked at the border without information where the drivers are. In some cases drivers have reported that they are not clear of the physical addresses of destination of the load in Angola. Angola Customs is investing in creating the best conditions for commercial and non commercial border users. Santa Clara border is undergoing a massive expansion with a view to become a regional and international example of trade facilitation infrastructures. |
|
|
NTB-000-483 |
1.1. Export subsidies
B33: Packaging requirements |
2012-01-03 |
South Africa: Beit Bridge |
Malawi |
Resolved
2012-01-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
I wish to bring to your attention that Malawi tobacco exports/trucks carrying Malawi tobacco are being held at Beit Bridge, Mesina and have been stuck at the border for over 10 days.
The reasons for the being held are the following:
1. The agent handling the consignment was informed that they should have an import permit, into South Africa, for the packaging that the tobacco was put in. The packaging used is hessian bags. But according to the exporting companies, the hessian bags have also been used to pack tobacco for export and these are internationally accepted packaging material for tobacco.
2. The company managed to get the import permit for the first time since years of exporting to South Africa from the Ministry of Agriculture. The permit is said to have had no mention of packaging material put only importation of tobacco.
3. The truck have still not been cleared even after obtaining the permit because the port officials are now querying why there is disparity in dates between the import permit and the date the tobacco arrived at the Border.
There is need for more clarification as to why the trucks are being held at the border. It is possible to get confirmation that the reason the trucks have been held is that they did not have an import permit for the hessian sack. Secondly, our company has informed us that upon being informed that they didn’t have an import permit for the hessian they went to the Ministry of Agriculture to obtain the permit which was issued and when presented to the border agencies, they were told that they could not release the trucks due to the disparity in the dates of arrival of the trucks and the time the permit was issued. Please we need confirming on these issues.
The company and their counterparts in Pretoria have tried to resolve the matter with Ministry of Agriculture and they have been told that the trucks can be released but the tobacco has now to be fumigated with a particular chemical before it can be allowed to enter in South Africa. The chemical has not been mentioned to the company.
In addition to all this, we have further been informed by the company that they had sent two trucks carrying tobacco through the same route two months ago and all these requirements were not requested by the official and now we are wondering why the sudden change. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Ministry of Agriculture, South Africa explained that the reason for refusing the consignment entry was that the exporter had not complied with South Africa plant health requirements. The consignment was carrying unmanufactured tobacco placed in second hand jute bags. As per the import requirements for entry into the Republic of South Africa, the client prior to export must apply for a Veterinary Import Permit and the relevant authority of the Republic of Malawi must issue a Veterinary Health Certificate. The consignment was therefore detained due to the fact that there was no veterinary import permit for the jute bags upon arrival and that the permit issued by Malawi did not comply with South African requirements. The consignment therefore posed a possible animal health risk with regards to foot and mouth.
The two loads consignment in jute bags from Malawi detained since 4 January 2012 at Beit Bridge Border post were released on 17 January 2012 by the Directorate of Animal Health , Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries , Republic of South Africa under strict conditions to ensure that consignment did not cause risk from foot and mouth disease. The directorate of Animal Health released the consignment on the following conditions:
i. That the consignment are sealed and moved directly to the destined facility in Oudshoom under a Red Cross permit.
ii. Upon arrival, at destination, the state veterinarian must be informed and he has to break the seals.
iii. Offloading and unpacking must take place under the supervision of the responsible person at the facility
iv. The jute bags must be destroyed under official veterinary supervision after offloading and removal of tobacco.
It should be noted that the permit requirement by Animal Health is not a NTB but rather the long time it took to find alternative solution which was only granted on 17 January 2012.
South Africa Requirements for second hand jute bags are as follows:
‘The consignment is to be accompanied by an original Veterinary Health Certificate completed and signed by a Veterinarian authorized thereto by a Veterinary Authority of the exporting country to the effect that the jute4 bags were subjected to the action of formalin fumes (formaldehyde gas) produced by its commercial solution at 35-40% in a chamber kept closed for at least 8 hours and at a minimum temperature of 19 degrees Celsius. The jute bags must then be kept protected from contamination and containerised or loaded onto trucks, covered with tarpaulin and sealed under veterinary supervision’ |
|
|
NTB-000-483 |
1.1. Export subsidies
B33: Packaging requirements |
2012-01-03 |
South Africa: Beit Bridge |
Malawi |
Resolved
2012-01-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
I wish to bring to your attention that Malawi tobacco exports/trucks carrying Malawi tobacco are being held at Beit Bridge, Mesina and have been stuck at the border for over 10 days.
The reasons for the being held are the following:
1. The agent handling the consignment was informed that they should have an import permit, into South Africa, for the packaging that the tobacco was put in. The packaging used is hessian bags. But according to the exporting companies, the hessian bags have also been used to pack tobacco for export and these are internationally accepted packaging material for tobacco.
2. The company managed to get the import permit for the first time since years of exporting to South Africa from the Ministry of Agriculture. The permit is said to have had no mention of packaging material put only importation of tobacco.
3. The truck have still not been cleared even after obtaining the permit because the port officials are now querying why there is disparity in dates between the import permit and the date the tobacco arrived at the Border.
There is need for more clarification as to why the trucks are being held at the border. It is possible to get confirmation that the reason the trucks have been held is that they did not have an import permit for the hessian sack. Secondly, our company has informed us that upon being informed that they didn’t have an import permit for the hessian they went to the Ministry of Agriculture to obtain the permit which was issued and when presented to the border agencies, they were told that they could not release the trucks due to the disparity in the dates of arrival of the trucks and the time the permit was issued. Please we need confirming on these issues.
The company and their counterparts in Pretoria have tried to resolve the matter with Ministry of Agriculture and they have been told that the trucks can be released but the tobacco has now to be fumigated with a particular chemical before it can be allowed to enter in South Africa. The chemical has not been mentioned to the company.
In addition to all this, we have further been informed by the company that they had sent two trucks carrying tobacco through the same route two months ago and all these requirements were not requested by the official and now we are wondering why the sudden change. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Ministry of Agriculture, South Africa explained that the reason for refusing the consignment entry was that the exporter had not complied with South Africa plant health requirements. The consignment was carrying unmanufactured tobacco placed in second hand jute bags. As per the import requirements for entry into the Republic of South Africa, the client prior to export must apply for a Veterinary Import Permit and the relevant authority of the Republic of Malawi must issue a Veterinary Health Certificate. The consignment was therefore detained due to the fact that there was no veterinary import permit for the jute bags upon arrival and that the permit issued by Malawi did not comply with South African requirements. The consignment therefore posed a possible animal health risk with regards to foot and mouth.
The two loads consignment in jute bags from Malawi detained since 4 January 2012 at Beit Bridge Border post were released on 17 January 2012 by the Directorate of Animal Health , Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries , Republic of South Africa under strict conditions to ensure that consignment did not cause risk from foot and mouth disease. The directorate of Animal Health released the consignment on the following conditions:
i. That the consignment are sealed and moved directly to the destined facility in Oudshoom under a Red Cross permit.
ii. Upon arrival, at destination, the state veterinarian must be informed and he has to break the seals.
iii. Offloading and unpacking must take place under the supervision of the responsible person at the facility
iv. The jute bags must be destroyed under official veterinary supervision after offloading and removal of tobacco.
It should be noted that the permit requirement by Animal Health is not a NTB but rather the long time it took to find alternative solution which was only granted on 17 January 2012.
South Africa Requirements for second hand jute bags are as follows:
‘The consignment is to be accompanied by an original Veterinary Health Certificate completed and signed by a Veterinarian authorized thereto by a Veterinary Authority of the exporting country to the effect that the jute4 bags were subjected to the action of formalin fumes (formaldehyde gas) produced by its commercial solution at 35-40% in a chamber kept closed for at least 8 hours and at a minimum temperature of 19 degrees Celsius. The jute bags must then be kept protected from contamination and containerised or loaded onto trucks, covered with tarpaulin and sealed under veterinary supervision’ |
|
|
NTB-000-395 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2011-02-11 |
Mozambique: "FRIGO" customs clearing in Maputo |
Mozambique |
Resolved
2012-03-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Meat in brine imported from South Africa classified under tariff code 0210.20.00 being subjected to 15% import duty. We have been importing under tarrif code 0210.20.00 for 18 mnths without paying duty. Now a ruling was made on 11 February that duty of 15% is applicable.Mozambique customs does not agree with the tarrif code notwithstanding that this is the code accepted by South Africa as correct. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique reported that the 15% duty is the applicable duty under her preferential tariff reductions offer to South Africa. Mozambique tariff reduction offer for RSA began in 2011 and goes up to 2015.
The goods in question, classified in HS code 02.10.20.00 is of class C1, according to Mozambique’s offer and the percentage of duties in 2011 is of 5% for the other SADC Member States, while for RSA it’s maintained at 15%. The application of zero (0) tax for 18 months was a result of miss interpretation of the Customs Tariff, a fact that was later corrected by the competent authority. Service Order nº 3, from January 11 from the Revenue Department established a 15% tax for class C1 goods coming from RSA and 5 % for products coming from other SADC Member States. |
|
|
Products:
|
0210.20: Meat of bovine animals, salted, in brine, dried or smoked |
|
|
NTB-000-395 |
2.2. Arbitrary customs classification |
2011-02-11 |
Mozambique: "FRIGO" customs clearing in Maputo |
Mozambique |
Resolved
2012-03-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Meat in brine imported from South Africa classified under tariff code 0210.20.00 being subjected to 15% import duty. We have been importing under tarrif code 0210.20.00 for 18 mnths without paying duty. Now a ruling was made on 11 February that duty of 15% is applicable.Mozambique customs does not agree with the tarrif code notwithstanding that this is the code accepted by South Africa as correct. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique confirmed that the duty applied on tariff cod 0210.20.00 is zero. Customs Authorities have rectified the problem and are not charging duty on the product. |
|
|
Products:
|
0210.20: Meat of bovine animals, salted, in brine, dried or smoked |
|
|
NTB-000-423 |
7.1. Arbitrariness |
2011-07-12 |
Mozambique: Dondo |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2012-03-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Zimbabwe transport hauliers companies continue to have problems with certain Mozambique authorities. Mozambique authorities (Police at Dondo) are not accepting certified copies of registration books on grounds that if the vehicle does get stolen there are no legal document to prove the vehicle belongs to transporting company. CVR amendments are also not accepted. It looks like the Police are unnecessary targeting Zimbabwe registered vehicles. They are being unreasonable with their fines which are imposed citing very minor faults on vehicles. The police at Dondo hassle the drivers and find no apparent reason to issue tickets.
Forbes border post is hassling drivers, especially the agriculture department. They say that an agriculture permit is required but the documents s gets checked in Beira, Dondo and Inchope. But when they get to the border they claim that this permit is required. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
In a consulative meeting held between SADC Secretariat and Focal Points on 19 September 2011 in Maputo, Mozambique reported that, according to existing laws, it is illegal to carry notarised documents. The SADC secretariat in liaison with reporting and imposing country, will facilitate further consultations on the matter if necessary.
2. With regards to agriculture documentation, Moambique reported that documentation is processed by the relevant departments and institutions at the border , therefore this issue does not arise and is considered resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-381 |
7.1. Arbitrariness
Policy/Regulatory |
2010-06-08 |
Mozambique: Posto Fiscal de Cobue |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2012-03-27 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique police are charging fines to transporters although their Registration Books have been notarised by the Mozambique Embassy. Notarised Documents are acceptable throughout Mozambique except in other areas particularly the Beira region. Transporters from Malawi and Zimbabwe entering through Mulange/Muloza ; Forbes/Machipanda; Nyamapanda/Cuchamano; Dedza/Calomue and Mwanza/Zobue border posts are affected by these fines. Authorities in these corridors do not accept certified copies of the documents. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique reported that the Interior Ministry advised that the Road Traffic Code states that the circulation within Mozambican territory with a photocopied document is illegal. Article 42 ( 2) of the Road Traffic Code and Article 7 (2) of Decree no. 68/2008 of 30th December. The fine is set at 200,00 Mts and not 2000,00Mts as was reportedly charged.
2. In a meeting held between SADC secretariat and Mozambique focal [points on 19 September 2011, it was agreed that the SADC secretariat would facilitate consultations between reporting and imposing country on this matter.
3. On 27 March 2012, Mozambique reiterated its position that , the road code in Mozambique states clearly that the driving is subject to an original valid driving license only.
Certified copies of driving licenses are not allowed. Following NTB mission in September, 2011 this complain is resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-399 |
7.3. Corruption |
2011-02-21 |
Zimbabwe: kariba border post |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2012-03-28 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Lake harvest company was refused to export fish using kariba bridge on this particular date yet they were allowed to do so ,the man who was on interpol this day wanted some money from this company as bribe ,after refusal he denied to stamp the gate pass, this led to the fish to be bad and it was 4tonnes,all that fish perished as they took long in negitiating |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
At the 9th meeting of the SADC Sub-committee on trade facilitation, Zimbabwe reported that complaints relating to bribery should be reported immediately to the officer in charge for traceability and immediate action besides the online system for transparency. This could have been a once off incidence |
|
|
NTB-000-399 |
7.3. Corruption |
2011-02-21 |
Zimbabwe: kariba border post |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2012-03-28 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Lake harvest company was refused to export fish using kariba bridge on this particular date yet they were allowed to do so ,the man who was on interpol this day wanted some money from this company as bribe ,after refusal he denied to stamp the gate pass, this led to the fish to be bad and it was 4tonnes,all that fish perished as they took long in negitiating |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
This issue was discussed by the National Monitoring Committee at their workshop held on 21 July in Harare which noted that such incidences do occur and proposed that the concerned authorities, namely Police Department and the Ministry of Industry and Commerce take up the matter for investigation with a view to putting in place systems for detterement of such practices in future.
On 22 March 2012, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority Focal Point reported that ZIMRA had since had consultations with Zimbabwe Republic Police on this once off incident. The two parties expect that this would not happen again. The Lake Harest Company was advised that, in future , they should report such incidences immediately either to ZIMRA or the the Senior police officers at Kariba so that they are dealt with immediately . This matter is therefore considered resolved |
|
English
Français
