Vegetable Import Ban: New Report Emphasises SA’s Objections

South Africa has released a strongly worded report raising objections to decisions by neighbouring Botswana and Namibia to ban importation of a range of its vegetables at the beginning of 2022. The report is a preliminary result of that country’s Department of Trade, Industry and Competition to contexualise “the ban on South African vegetables by Namibia and Botswana within the prism of regional integration”. [ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type="show" ihc_mb_who="1,2,3,4" ihc_mb_template="3" ] It says while Botswana and Namibia “have a right to protect their economic interests, the prohibition may not be in the spirit of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) which seeks to promote intra-Africa trade”. It cites Article 18(1) of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) that provides for free movement of goods produced within the common customs area. “However, it is the exception provided for in Article 18(2) that allows for member states a right to restrict goods on grounds such as human/animal health or environmental reasons that causes much discontent and raises a lot of questions, as the main reason for the recent vegetable ban of SA exports by both Botswana and Namibia,” says the report. Public morals A number of reasons, it continues, could be advanced but the most ranking ones should be within what context is the ban justified since it could not be argued it threatened human or animal health, or the environment and others such as public morals. “Secondly, the ban has economic significance and consequences, something that Article 18(2) of the SACU Agreement is silent on and does not make economic grounds as reason to impose a ban,” says the report. It asserts that such a grey area is inconsistent with World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules such as whether the product banned is causing economic damage either because it is alleged to be dumped, subsidised or there is a surge and with all that bound to attract trade remedies of one form or another (i.e. anti-dumping duties, countervailing measures or safeguards). “In both countries’ cases, it would appear then that none of those potential economic damage occurrences were argued but rather both just invoked provisions of Article 18(2) in a generic manner,” the report argues. No economic threat “Moreover, analysis of SA vegetable exports to both countries further support the notion that there was no immediate or potential economic threat to those countries.” The report says South Africa’s total agricultural exports to Botswana and Namibia did not show any signs of acceleration in the past five years and that vegetable exports remained a tiny fraction of total agricultural exports over the same period. “Therefore, an economic damage argument notwithstanding, the fact that it is not provided for in the SACU Agreement could not be sustained by both countries,” it says. “The bans on South African vegetable exports destined for Namibia and Botswana will likely have a negative impact as local farmers will potentially plant fewer vegetables, a move that will hurt export revenue and lead to job losses across the vegetable supply chain in South Africa as well as lead to higher prices of vegetables, market inefficiencies and supply shortages in both countries due to lack of competition resulting in significant consumer and producer welfare losses.” Areas of common policy The report says the integration of SACU into the global economy requires a clear vision and plan of common policy integration within the customs union itself, which stretches beyond the trade in goods. It notes that areas of common policy on matters relating to services, investment and competition will also need to be covered and addressed to avoid areas of duplication, fragmentation and legal uncertainty. On New Year’s Day 2022, Namibia and Botswana halted imports of certain vegetable produce from South Africa, in bans that include tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, cabbage, lettuce, garlic, onions, ginger and fresh herbs. The two countries said they were imposing the bans to encourage production of vegetables locally and reduce dependenc on imports. [/ihc-hide-content]

From Promise to Pause: The Support Gap Holding Back Botswana’s Female Athletes

Orebonye’s Defiant Rise Through North Africa’s Football Battleground

Botswana Emerges as Sporting Powerhouse at 2025 RASA

With Eyes on Morocco, Botswana’s Mares Gear Up for WAFCON 2025 Amid Rising Hopes and Renewed Support

Business Mind, Football Heart: Babitseng’s Journey to the COSAFA Executive

Region 5 Empowers Optometrists for Inclusive Sport

From Promise to Pause: The Support Gap Holding Back Botswana’s Female Athletes

Orebonye’s Defiant Rise Through North Africa’s Football Battleground

Botswana Emerges as Sporting Powerhouse at 2025 RASA

With Eyes on Morocco, Botswana’s Mares Gear Up for WAFCON 2025 Amid Rising Hopes and Renewed Support

Business Mind, Football Heart: Babitseng’s Journey to the COSAFA Executive

Region 5 Empowers Optometrists for Inclusive Sport

Vegetable Import Ban: New Report Emphasises SA’s Objections

Says Namibian and Botswana bans are against the spirit of regional integration and AfCFTA’s promotion of intra-Africa trade

Navigation

Recent News

Site

Welcome Back!

Create New Account!

Retrieve your password

Are you sure want to unlock this post?

Are you sure want to cancel subscription?

Vegetable Import Ban: New Report Emphasises SA’s Objections

Says Namibian and Botswana bans are against the spirit of regional integration and AfCFTA’s promotion of intra-Africa trade

This content is locked

Navigation

Recent News

Site

Welcome Back!

Create New Account!

Retrieve your password

Are you sure want to unlock this post?

Are you sure want to cancel subscription?