| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-712 |
2.6. Additional taxes and other charges |
2016-06-30 |
Tanzania: Tanzania Revenue Authority |
Kenya |
Resolved
2016-12-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A Kenyan Exhibitor for the 40th Dar es Salaam International Tradefair charged duties on goods by TFDA and TRA. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 22nd Meeting of the EAC NTBs Forum held in December 2016 accepted Tanzania report that this was a once off incidence and that adequate arrangements had been put in pace to facilitate clearance of exhibitors goods during trade fair. |
|
|
NTB-000-708 |
8.6. Vehicle standards
Policy/Regulatory |
2016-04-30 |
Kenya: Mombasa sea port |
Uganda |
Resolved
2016-12-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Charging of a Ks. 30,000 fines for criminal offence (TR361/16) for lorries imported by Uganda from German without Mud Guards. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 22nd EAC NTBs forum held in December 2016 accepted Kenya report that the charges were not discriminatory therefore not an NTB. |
|
|
NTB-000-707 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin
Policy/Regulatory |
2016-05-04 |
Rwanda: Rwanda Revenue Authority |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2017-05-06 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Rwanda does not give preferential treatment for rice originating from Tanzania as per the requirement of the EAC Rules of origin |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 23rd Meeting of the EAC NTBs Forum held from 4- 6 MAy 2017 in Kampala, Rwanda reported that she was now according preferential treatment to Rice imported from Tanzania |
|
|
NTB-000-706 |
8.1. Government Policy and regulations
Policy/Regulatory |
2016-05-18 |
Uganda: Uganda Police |
Burundi |
Resolved
2016-12-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Uganda recognizes the COMESA yellow card insurance but it is not honoured once there is an accident. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 22nd meeting of the EAC NTBs Forum held in December 2016 , accepted Uganda report that she recognizes COMESA Yellow Card insurance. However the policy requires that all trucks involved in criminal accidents should be held to allow investigation. |
|
|
NTB-000-705 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2016-04-23 |
Rwanda: Rwanda Revenue Authority |
Burundi |
Resolved
2016-12-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Rwanda makes trucks to pay double the certificate of Transit Goods. That is US$400 instead of US$ 200 per truck and trailer separately |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The 22nd meeting of the NTBs forum held in December 2016 accepted Rwanda explanation that Rwanda was implementing the revised EAC Regulations on Customs Management Act, 2010.The Act stipulates that a pulling trailer is considered separate from the truck. This NTB was resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-704 |
1.14. Lack of coordination between government institutions |
2016-04-22 |
Uganda: Ministries responsible for Trade in Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda |
Kenya |
Resolved
2016-12-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Inadequate or no information on the change of export and import procedures |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
This NTB was resolved by the meeting of the 22nd NTBs Forum held from 5-7 December 2016. |
|
|
NTB-000-492 |
7.5. Lengthy procedures |
2012-03-01 |
South Africa: transit in south Africa |
Zambia |
Resolved
2017-01-17 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A private show company has made a complaint regarding the custom stoppages in South Africa.
The Company imports products from Durban and transit through South Africa, the company has been informed that their trucks will be undergoing a tunnel for physical inspections of goods in transit.
The company however, feel that this exercise is detrimental to their business as it is slow and will delay the arrival of goods and attract extra charges. The Company wonders why the good in transit should be stopped by customs/ police for inspections. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 29th December, Zambia Focal Point advised that they had contacted the complainant who confirmed that the problem had been rectified. |
|
|
NTB-000-722 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2016-08-29 |
South Africa: OR Tambo International Airport |
Lesotho |
Resolved
2016-11-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The South African Revenue Services at OR Tambo have detained consignment destined for Maseru since 29 August 2016 without explanation. This is yet another time when our goods are detained for more than a week and yet they are destined for Lesotho and not South Africa. The airway bill clearly has the address of the importer being in Lesotho but South African Customs detains the goods nonetheless. South African Customs is requested to explain the rationale for detaining goods destined for other countries , in this case Lesotho and whether it is lawful that goods which arrived on 29 August are still detained? |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Dear Focal Points South Africa and Lesotho,
This issue was resolved long time ago. However, the SADC secretariat recommended that a long term solution be secured that responds to such questions as asked by Lesotho on above comment. You are kindly requested to recommend a way forward on the long term solutions. Otherwise we need to resolve this NTB as per current status . South Africa Focal point is of the view that we resolve it and I agree. This NTB is therefore resolved on the understanding that the Focal Points of Lesotho and South Africa will make necessary arrangements to ensure that the problem does not repeat itself in future now that it has been identified.
System administrator |
|
|
NTB-000-717 |
8.6. Vehicle standards |
2016-07-13 |
Zambia: military base |
South Africa |
Resolved
2016-11-17 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Trucks from various countries including Zimbabwe, South Africa and Malawi origin transporting Maize bran legally with valid documentation and export permits issued by Zambian Dept of Agriculture were held at Kafue Weigh Bridge for almost a week, others longer than 3 weeks allegedly waiting for validation of export permits.
On 13 July permanent Secretary of Lusaka province arrived and Kafue bridge and after a short talk on maize smuggling to drivers ordered 31 of the trucks to be convoyed back to Lusaka to a military base under escort of military police to be impounded.
The drivers were told that upon arrival at the destination they were to take nothing from the trucks and leave. They were also told that where they were to sleep/reside was not the concern of the military personnel or authorities, it was their own problem.
At the military base the drivers manage to negotiate the removal of their clothing, blankets and personal effect , and were forced to hand over the keys to the vehicles and sign forms of impoundment.
This all for vehicles tranporting goods legally, all carrying clearing documentation legally processed by zambian clearing agents and valid legal permits issued by the Zambian Dept of Agriculture in Lusaka.
Subsequent to this another approximate 20 vehicles has experienced the same process.
Daily representations, discussions and meetings since then between various persons and organizations representing transporters and the office of the permanent Secretary of Lusaka yield no results or explanation for the impoundment of vehicles carrying legal documents, nor a date when the vehicles will be released.
Drivers are out on the streets, many with no suitable place to sleep. Some, out of desperation resorted to hitch-hiking back to their home countries.
Transporters are incurring heavy losses.
We urgently request that these trucks be released by the military and Zambian Authorities as this is costing the Transporters a lot of money in lost revenue and it is illegal for the Zambian Authorities and army to hold legally operated trucks.
The incident is also going to be escalated via the relevant countries' embassies/high commissions and Trade Authorities . |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 17th November 2016, South Focal Point confirmed that the NTB had been resolved . |
|
|
NTB-000-434 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2010-04-15 |
Madagascar: Customs |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2015-12-16 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Madagascar does not confer originating status to Citron Plus soap manufactured by Mauritius and exported to Madagascar |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the 27th COMESA TC Committee in August 2011, the COMESA Secretariat was directed to liaise with Madagascar to implement the Council decision taken at its 29th Meeting in Lusaka to provide justification for refusing the COMESA Certificate. Currently, Mopirove is exporting without difficulty . However an official decision is yet to be communicated to mauritius to avoid the risk that Madagascar Customs can refuse the COMESA Certificate of Origin from Mauritius |
|
|
Products:
|
3401.11: Soap and organic surface-active products and preparations, in the form of bars, cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, and paper, wadding, felt and nonwovens, impregnated, coated or covered with soap or detergent, for toilet use, incl. medicated products |
|
|
NTB-000-434 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2010-04-15 |
Madagascar: Customs |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2015-12-16 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Madagascar does not confer originating status to Citron Plus soap manufactured by Mauritius and exported to Madagascar |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The two parties agreed that the issue does not constitute an NTB because the soap exported by Mauritius to Madagascar enters duty free therefore its not a NTB. This matter is therefore resolved . Madagascar requested the Secretariat to organise . Mauritius confirmed that Exports are no longer subjects to verification on RoO. |
|
|
Products:
|
3401.11: Soap and organic surface-active products and preparations, in the form of bars, cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, and paper, wadding, felt and nonwovens, impregnated, coated or covered with soap or detergent, for toilet use, incl. medicated products |
|
|
NTB-000-434 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2010-04-15 |
Madagascar: Customs |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2015-12-16 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Madagascar does not confer originating status to Citron Plus soap manufactured by Mauritius and exported to Madagascar |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the COMESA NTBs Focal Points meeting held in August 2016, Madagascar and Mauritius informed the meeting that this NTB had been resolved in line with the decision of the 28th COMESA Council of Ministers |
|
|
Products:
|
3401.11: Soap and organic surface-active products and preparations, in the form of bars, cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, and paper, wadding, felt and nonwovens, impregnated, coated or covered with soap or detergent, for toilet use, incl. medicated products |
|
|
NTB-000-674 |
2.14. Other |
2015-07-03 |
Mozambique: Posto Fiscal de Calomue |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2016-10-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
TRANSHAUL Zimbabwe had 2 trucks arrive at Calomue border on Friday 3 July loaded with groundnuts, they were told they had to wait for a free escort on Monday, or pay for an escort to take them to Cuchamano on Saturday. Against our advise, our client paid the fees being demanded ($100 / truck) after which, the escort only went as far as Tete with the trucks, where they were told they should pay again for another escort to take them through to Cuchamano. Again, our client paid the escort fees. The transporter had another 2 trucks arrive at Calomue on Monday 6 July with groundnuts, who were again told they must pay for escort, or wait until Wednesday for someone to escort them for free. I have told our client not to pay.
The adding of a commodity to the anti-dumping list with an escort requirement by customs needs to be documented and communicated prior to the introduction thereof. Also the communication should clearly state what the cost if any of the escorts are from point of entry to point of exit and availability of escorts.
The current situation being applied as described under paragraph one is not acceptable and needs to be clarified by Alfandega agents at Calomue border demanding escort fees from drivers without documentary proof. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present. |
|
|
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-000-518 |
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-000-425 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2011-07-21 |
Democratic Republic of the Congo: Kasumbalesa |
South Africa |
Resolved
2016-10-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
DRC transit charges are too exhorbitant. For example, a truck delivering to Tenke, will have to pay $340 + 750 + 125 + 125 = $1340 for one return trip.That is, providing the truck doesn’t wait more than one day at the Zambian border.
There have been many complaints about it, but little seems to be done. There are ongoing efforts by the RFA and other stakeholders to get the toll fees as low as possible yielded some positive resulted in a once off reduction of the fees which still are too high. Each trip through Kasumbalesa to Lubumbashi costs a staggering US$ 125.There is need for transparency and fair toll fees at regional level. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present. |
|
|
NTB-000-379 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2010-02-19 |
Democratic Republic of the Congo: Kasumbalesa |
Namibia |
Resolved
2016-10-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
DRC is charging exorbitant fees which are not in line with SADC and COMESA harmonized fees.From 01/02/10 DRC did not reduce their tolls they instead greatly increases
them. Road tolls in DRC are about 15 ( 1500 % ) times greater than the SADC
recommended. Today a foreign transporter entering DRC at Kasumbalesa going to Tenke
Fungurume mine ( 300 kms each way ) is subject to the following tolls and
fees (distance of 300 kms into DRC and 300 kms out of DRC): Road toll Kasumbalesa/Lubumbashi return $ 300 ; Road tolls Lubumbashi/Likasi return $ 300; Road tolls Likasi/Tenke return $ 150 ; Government tax $ 50 ; Fumigation Fees $ 50 ; Card entry $ 15 ; Tourism/Vaccination fees $ 35 ; Visa for truck $ 25 ; Break bulk fees $ 20. Total cost to the transporter in Fees and Tolls is $ 945. That works out at $
157.5 per 100 kms. The SADC agreed is $ 10 per 100 kms. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present. |
|
|
NTB-000-353 |
7.9. Inadequate trade related infrastructure |
2010-02-10 |
SADC |
Namibia |
Resolved
2016-10-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A truck legally loaded in Namibia may not be legally loaded in another SADC country due to lack of uniform loads and Gross Vehicle Mass (GVM) standards in SADC. There is need to standardize the axle loads |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
FESARTA reported that this NTB was no longer in place |
|
|
NTB-000-256 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-09-08 |
Democratic Republic of the Congo: Kasumbalesa |
Namibia |
Resolved
2016-10-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
DRC customs, cause problems on road transport through delaying trucks to depart on time to Lubumbashi |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present. |
|
|
NTB-000-216 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees |
2009-07-27 |
SADC |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2016-10-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Toll fees variation within the region hampers smooth transit of goods. Toll fees should be rationalised. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
FESARTA reported that the NTB does not exist at present. |
|
English
Français
