| Complaint number |
NTB Type
|
Date of incident |
Location |
Reporting country or region (additional) |
Status |
Actions |
|
NTB-000-616 |
6.5. Variable levies |
2013-12-01 |
Zambia: Nakonde District Council |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2016-08-25 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Nakonde District Council of Zambia has introduced new Council Levy for external trucks entering Zambia in addition to other existing charges and levies. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 25 August 2016, Zambia Focal point reiterated the fact 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. This is therefore a policy measure notified to stakeholders . The NTB is considered resolved because stakeholders have been made aware of the regulations . The same will also be contained in the 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-000-558 |
2.3. Issues related to the rules of origin |
2012-10-06 |
Zimbabwe: Beitbridge |
Zimbabwe |
Resolved
2013-08-07 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
My company was importing a pallet of various alcoholic beverages. The consignment was accompanied by the required SADC origin papers from the manufacturer in South Africa. When the pallet was searched officers found, on the label of one of the products, bottled in south, produce of mexico. Upon seeing this the officers immediately seized the tequila, along with some South African made whiskey. Firstly this is in contravention to the SADC protocols of trade, whereby- Rule 9 of the protocols of trade, sections 3 and 4-
3. The competent authority designated by an importing Member State may in exceptional circumstances and notwithstanding the presentation of a certificate issued in accordance with the provisions of this Rule, require, in case of doubt, further verification of the statement contained in the certificate. Member States, through their competent authorities, shall assist each other in this process. Such further verification should be made within three months of the request being made by a competent authority designated by the importing Member State. The form used for this purpose shall be that contained in Appendix IV to this Annex.
4.The importing Member State shall not prevent the importer from taking delivery of goods solely on the grounds that it requires further evidence, but may require security for any duty or other charge which may be payable: provided that where goods are subject to any prohibitions, the conditions for delivery under security shall not apply.
This section clearly states the rules and procedures to be followed when there is a query on the legitimacy of the origin of a product. The Zimbabwean border officials ignored these and seized the goods.
Upon seizure we were given the opportunity to appeal the seizure and prove the origin of the goods.
We did this and the Station Manager at Beitbridge completely ignored all of the evidence we sent him. We have documentation from the manufacturer, proving the origin of the goods, further we gave them the contacts of various people in the South African Tax Department to verify their claims. All of this was summarily ignored and we were issued a notice to pay the duties due for a non-sadc product, and a fine. Together this figure amounts to almost double the value of the products. We have since appealed to the ZIMRA Commissioner General to have the fines and duties repealed and the products released, and are awaiting reply. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
SADC Secretariat, in consultation with Zimbabwe Revenue Authority recommended that the NTB be considered resolved and that the importer be educated about issues of origin within the context of a Free Trade Area. ZIMRA reported that seizure of the consignment was done in terms of Section 193 (1) of the Zimbabwe Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02) which reads "Subject to subsection (3), an officer may seize any goods, ship, aircraft or vehicle (hereinafter in this section referred to as articles) which he has reasonable grounds for believing are liable to seizure". In this case the origin of the goods was incorrect. |
|
|
Products:
|
2208.30: Whiskies and 2208.70: Liqueurs and cordials |
|
|
NTB-000-411 |
1.1. Export subsidies
A15: Authorization requirement for importers for sanitary and phytosanitary reasons |
2011-03-23 |
South Africa: National Dept Agricultural
Registrar : Act no 36 of 1947 |
South Africa |
Resolved
2011-04-21 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
My company submitted renewal of existing Farm Feed Registrations at 12 Dec 2010
All the FF regestrations have expired on 28 Feb. 2011
We have enqeired numerous times on the renewal with no satisfaction.
Th ecompany is stuck with 1000mt of cotton oilcake and 100mt of meat and bone meal that can not come in to South Africa from Zimbabwe and Namibia
The local feed plants and feed lots are running out of stock with no local stocks to supply. We therefore seek help to have our applications processed by the relevant Ministry/Department |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Department of Agriculture & Fisheries renewd the licence on 28 March 2011 |
|
|
Products:
|
1207.2: - Cotton seeds : |
|
|
NTB-000-903 |
8.4. Transport related corruption |
2019-04-05 |
Kenya: Miritini, Samburu, Mariakani, Mtito Andei, Kibwezi, Machakos, Mlolongo, Nairobi, Mahimahiu, Naivasha, Nakuru, Salgaa, Molo, Kapsabet, Malaba, Eldoret |
Rwanda |
Resolved
2020-09-01 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Multiple police check points from Mombasa to Malaba (Miritini, Samburu, Mariakani, Mtito Andei, Kibwezi, Machakos, Mlolongo, Nairobi, Mahimahiu, Naivasha, Nakuru, Salgaa, Molo, Kapsabet, Malaba, Eldoret).
During the 27th RMC meeting the Republic of Rwanda reported that there are many check points from Mombasa port to Malaba/Busia which charge money to transporters. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The RMC held on 1 September 2020, agreed that this NTB is resolved and urged Kenya to make sure road blocks don't emerge again |
|
|
NTB-001-179 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2024-05-01 |
Uganda: Government officials |
Tanzania |
Resolved
2025-05-30 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mpondwe Border Government Officials forcefully offload transit cargo for Tanzania traders.
In May 2024, Government Officials from the Republic of Uganda intercepted processed salted fish from Tanzania in transit to the Democratic Republic of Congo at the Mpondwe Border and were forced to break the seal of the cargo and sell the fish at the Mpondwe market. This is against Trade Facilitation Laws on how to treat Goods in Transit and led to great loss to Tanzanian traders in terms of capital and market. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
The Republic of Uganda reported that the NTB was resolved, hence Tanzanian fish can access the DRC market without any interception.
NTB RESOLVED |
|
|
NTB-000-478 |
8.6. Vehicle standards
Policy/Regulatory |
2011-12-20 |
Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Cuchamano |
South Africa |
Resolved
2015-02-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique restricts an articulated vehicle carrying general cargo, to 18 metres length. It restricts an artic carrying ISO shipping containers to 16.5 metres length. This does not conform to the recommendations given by both COMESA and SADC. Generally, artics in Southern Africa are up to 18.5 metres in length, in accordance with the SADC recommendations. Transporters cannot practically shorten their artics and comply with the Mozambique regulations. Fines are received by transporters when they try to travel through Mozambique with artics longer than 16.5 or 18 metres. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 31st May 2012, Mozambique reported that , consultations were held with authorities responsible for transport regulations which submitted the following update:
Decree 14/2008 of 25 June 2008, “approves the Regulations for weights and dimensions, Combinations and spreading of Cargo in Motor vehicles and Trailers and revokes Articles 18, 19, 24, and 27 of the Road Code”
Article 5 “ Maximum dimensions”
Nº. 1. The contour of vehicles involving all accessories, except rear view mirrors and direction indicators may not exceed the following values regarding the types of vehicles:
A. Length:
a) Vehicle with one or more axles -13m
b) Articulated vehicles with 3 or more axles -18m
c) Sets Vehicle-trailer -22m
d) Trailers with one or more axles -13m
e) Trailers for agricultural traction of:
i. One axle -7m
ii. Two or more axles -10m
B. Width - 2,60 m
C. Height - (measured from the ground) – 4,3m~
Nº. 2. Articulated vehicles specially adapted and approved by the National Traffic Institute for the transport of containers. The maximum length for this type of vehicles is 16,50m.
N° 8. The National Traffic Institute may authorize:
a) The transit of vehicles that transport indivisible objects that exceed the limits;
b) The registration or transit of special vehicles with dimensions exceeding the limits.
This Article must be read with Article 58 (1) of the new Road Traffic Code - Decree Nº 1/2011.
Art. 58 “Special Authorization”
N.º 1. According to the conditions specified in the Rules, INAV may allow the transit of vehicles exceeding the weight or dimensions legally allowed or transporting indivisible objects that exceed the size of the vehicles.
N.º 2 The referred authorizations require a favourable opinion from ANE and the Municipal Councils, depending on the cases, regarding the nature of the road paving, the resistance of art works along the routes or the technical specifications of the public roads. Thus limiting the access of such vehicles to roads whose specifications allow such transit.
From the above mentioned articles it is understood that, although the law specifies the limit of 16.5 m, the transporter or operator may request from INAV a “Transit Permit” which will involve police escort. This permit costs 398, 00MTn which is equivalent to approximately R 110.00.
Vehicles are expected to conform to the decree. |
|
|
NTB-000-478 |
8.6. Vehicle standards
Policy/Regulatory |
2011-12-20 |
Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Cuchamano |
South Africa |
Resolved
2015-02-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique restricts an articulated vehicle carrying general cargo, to 18 metres length. It restricts an artic carrying ISO shipping containers to 16.5 metres length. This does not conform to the recommendations given by both COMESA and SADC. Generally, artics in Southern Africa are up to 18.5 metres in length, in accordance with the SADC recommendations. Transporters cannot practically shorten their artics and comply with the Mozambique regulations. Fines are received by transporters when they try to travel through Mozambique with artics longer than 16.5 or 18 metres. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 10 February 2015, Mozambique Focal Point requested that this NTB be resolved on grounds that FESARTA was not forthcoming with additional information on proof of payment and the place where the accident occurred to assist with the investigation on the incident. Further, according to the existing Regulation (Decree 14/2008 of 25 June), it should be noted that Mozambique does not have infrastructure prepared to adopt the specifications of South Africa, so that the movement of carriers in Mozambique is made on specific routes. The Portuguese version is uploaded onto the system for reference. However, Mozambique was working towards adapting their laws in line with SADC recommendations about size and weights of vehicles. |
|
|
NTB-000-478 |
8.6. Vehicle standards
Policy/Regulatory |
2011-12-20 |
Mozambique: Delegação Aduaneira de Cuchamano |
South Africa |
Resolved
2015-02-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique restricts an articulated vehicle carrying general cargo, to 18 metres length. It restricts an artic carrying ISO shipping containers to 16.5 metres length. This does not conform to the recommendations given by both COMESA and SADC. Generally, artics in Southern Africa are up to 18.5 metres in length, in accordance with the SADC recommendations. Transporters cannot practically shorten their artics and comply with the Mozambique regulations. Fines are received by transporters when they try to travel through Mozambique with artics longer than 16.5 or 18 metres. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 10 February 2015, Mozambique Focal Point advised that the NTB be resolved in according to the existing Regulation (Decree 14/2008 of 25 June) and that it should be noted that Mozambique did not have infrastructure prepared to adopt the specifications of South Africa, so that the movement of carriers in Mozambique is made on specific routes. However, Mozambique was working towards conforming to SADC specifications on vehicle length and weights.
FESARTA confirmed that there had been no reports of recent problems with NTB 478 and therefore the NTB should be resolved. FESARTA made an observation that the regulation was probably introduced many years ago, when there could have been a particular issue that resulted in the regulation and that the regulation may not have any relevance now. |
|
|
NTB-000-325 |
7.8. Consular and Immigration Issues |
2009-09-09 |
Mozambique: Ministry of Home Affairs |
Eswatini |
Resolved
2010-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique requires visas for swaziland business people |
|
|
NTB-000-350 |
7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) |
2010-02-10 |
Mozambique: Ministry of Trade |
Mozambique |
Resolved
2011-06-08 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique private sector do not have information regarding tariffs obtaining in the SADC FTA. They are also not conversant with the SADC certificate of origin |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique, reported that there exists a confederation of association of the private sector (CTA) in which there is a working group that deals with customs matters, which participates in all meetings and events related to the subject. |
|
|
NTB-000-671 |
8.8. Issues related to transit |
2015-04-08 |
Mozambique: Beira |
|
Resolved
2016-09-13 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique Police in Beira issued a ticket or fine for 50,000 metical or US $1500 to the driver of a Zimbabwe registered vehicle AC 5376 owned by Suncrest Transport for supposedly violating the third country rule by collecting a load in South Africa, transiting Zimbabwe and delivering or offloading in Beira, Mozambique and this route not being covered by a cross-border permit.
The fine or ticket issued referred to Article 102 of the Road Traffic Act (Places in which Pedestrians may walk) and is not related to the offence, also the fine or ticket does not specify the nature of the offence and only refers to the detention or removal of documents as per Article 122 of the Road Traffic Act (see attached ticket).
The cross-border permits for the subject vehicle (AC 5376) and attached hereto confirm that the vehicle was authorized to use this route and therefore was improperly fined by the Mozambique Police.
This is harrasment of the driver and the action required is the revoking of the fine. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 13th September 2016, FESARTA advised that the transporters were no longer facing this barrier so the NTB is resolved. |
|
|
NTB-000-596 |
8.6. Vehicle standards
Policy/Regulatory |
2013-06-19 |
Mozambique: Dondo , Beira |
Malawi |
Resolved
2014-11-20 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique Police at Dondo, Beira have fined a Malawian truck belonging to ZAGAF Transport, truck number ZA8837/BN4273 because of the blue line on the colour of the trailer which is recorded as White in the blue book. White is the primary colour. The trailer has a small blue line and the police are demanding that this should be indicated in the blue book too. The blue book conforms to Malawi vehicle registration requirements where only the primary colour is indicated in the blue book. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
On 20th November 2014, Malawi focal point reported that Malawi transporters were no longer experiencing this problem in Mozambique. This NTB was therefore 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-000-238 |
7.6. Lack of information on procedures (or changes thereof) |
2009-08-13 |
SADC |
Mozambique |
Resolved
2011-02-06 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique is experiencing difficulties using the NTBs online reporting system because it does not have a portuguese version. It is not enough to translate the user guide because users need to intract with the system itself. The secretariat should urgently look into this issue to enable Portuguese speaking countries to utilise the system. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Website has been translated into French and Portuguese languages |
|
|
NTB-000-131 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-07-26 |
Mozambique: Other Mozambique |
Eswatini |
Resolved
2010-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique customs rules vary, causing long delays at the borders. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique reported that all the Mozambican borders rules and procedures are already harmonized and standardized within the SADC Regional Integration and the World Customs Organization (WCO), the rules applied in Mozambique border are consistent with procedures used at Swaziland border and SADC countries. |
|
|
NTB-000-326 |
2.7. International taxes and charges levied on imports and other tariff measures |
2009-09-09 |
Mozambique: Mozambique Revenue Authority |
Eswatini |
Resolved
2010-11-22 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique customs charges can be as high as 200% of the value of goods transported |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Reporting country could not verify the complaint hence it was deemed resolved until a specific report is made. |
|
|
NTB-000-095 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-07-26 |
Mozambique: Mozambique Revenue Authority |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2010-11-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique companies importing paints from Mauritius have to pay a percentage of the customs duty upfront and the balance settled when clearing the goods. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Mozambique reported that the question does not constitute a nontariff barrier, the Customs following a procedure laid that allows the granting of early release upon bail in a maximum of 72 hours. Eventually may be delays in the clearing process, in that case is not the customs responsibility but the Clearing Agent. |
|
|
NTB-000-095 |
2.8. Lengthy and costly customs clearance procedures |
2009-07-26 |
Mozambique: Mozambique Revenue Authority |
Mauritius |
Resolved
2010-11-10 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mozambique companies importing paints from Mauritius have to pay a percentage of the customs duty upfront and the balance settled when clearing the goods. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
Complaint was resolved |
|
|
NTB-000-711 |
8.7. Costly Road user charges /fees
Policy/Regulatory |
2016-06-30 |
Kenya: Mombasa County |
Burundi |
Resolved
2017-10-20 |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Mombasa County in Kenya charges transit fees of ksh 6,000 for transit cargo truck. |
|
|
Resolution status note:
|
During the Dedicated Session of the Permanent/ Principal/Under Secretaries of Trade and EAC Affairs meeting held in Kampala to resolve long standing NTBs, Kenya reported that the internal consultations with the County Government of Mombasa had been concluded and the charge has been abolished. |
|
English
Français
