Expertise/News

FSMA, the new paradigm of preventive control

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

The FDA, US Food and Drug Administration (only its role in food control will be considered in this article), has recently started work with the new Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The application continues to be the subject of consolidation measures. The FSMA is undoubtedly the new Paradigm that will affect the way we approach food safety management in the decades to come. It is the culmination of the Federal Agency’s continuous efforts over more than a century to adapt the approach to food safety control to the food trade, which is becoming more complex year-on-year in parallel with the globalization of trade. The law introduces a considerable relaxation of administrative procedures and, at the same time, greater accountability of private operators to the new regulations.

The efforts mentioned started at the beginning of the last century. FDA inspectors at the time used to go through food outlets, including fairground markets, to take samples and carry out laboratory tests on which the previous control system called “Sampling Control” was based. But among the shortcomings of this control practice, revealed afterwards, is the fact that between the time of sampling and the exit of the analyses, the goods are still on sale and, in the event of a health problem, consumers are likely to pay the price and potentially suffer. Taking into account these weaknesses of the aforementioned control system, also applied to drugs at the time, coupled with the occurrence of fatal incidents, led the FDA to implement the 1938 regulation which required operators to ensure the safety of their product before placing it on the market. Subsequently, this law was amended on several occasions, which is to say at the appearance of each health incident requiring consideration in law. For this reason, the law based on “Sampling control” is qualified as reactive.

HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point), as a food safety control approach, has been hailed as the first attempt to prevent incidents before they materialize. As a corollary, the laboratory analyzes mentioned above represent only one facet of the current control system.

But before the US crowning of the HACCP as a reference tool of appreciation of the quality of work in the units of production, there are about thirty years, the first applications of its use had already seen the day first in the cases of so-called “LACF” and “AF” products. These two food categories have been the two main gateways for food products exported to the US market since the 1970s.

In the case of “LACF” products, for “Law Acid Canned Food”, the rule is that these canned foods are heat-treated to destroy the Botulism bacteria that has been the cause of several fatal incidents in the USA until the early seventies (before the application of the “LACF” rules). The “LACF” regulation is essentially for products sterilized by autoclave. For price considerations of autoclaves, including ancillary items (crimping equipment, maintenance contracts etc.), Moroccan operators, very often small, are far from competitive in the US market for this type of products. Canned sardine exports in the past may be considered an exception that is subject to particularly favorable circumstances.

Foods known as “A / F”, for “Acidified Food”, are acid, or acidified, products (pH 4.6 or lower). Since pathogenic bacteria, of Botulism in particular, do not develop in such a medium, a moderate heat treatment is sufficient for such types of products also called “Pickles”. Italians in particular, but also Spaniards and some Eastern European countries, have heavily invested in this sector to have very competitive technologies. For the moment, this is not yet the case for Morocco. The result is that these people are buying our targeted raw materials (olives, capers, tomatoes and others), processing them in their units and exporting these “Pickles” to the US market at prices we cannot immediately follow. This leaves us, regarding the two “doors” mentioned above, with the only possibility to sell our raw materials in bulk and make small profits while the above mentioned intermediaries prepare our products according to accessible technologies and resell them under our eyes on US market with great profits.

It should be remembered that the two gateways to US market summarized above have been optimized primarily to counter the risk posed by botulinum toxin. Certain organoleptic qualities of the products can actually be lost, following the sterilization treatment for example. Moreover, the previous US regulation   has not shown a great interest for other non-optimized commercial products according to one of these two options. This is, for example, the case of products whose safety is ensured by a salt concentration or dehydrated products and others. But, considering the globalization of trade is becoming more effective and a more openness of the US market on other foreign products, developed according to ancestral recipes but which have been proven over hundreds of years, as the case for many of our Moroccan local products, the FSMA came up with innovative solutions to allow their access to the US market. The reasoning is no longer to comply with a gateway, with previously established conditions, but to show that a production system (Process) to produce a given food guarantees the safety of the food. It is in fact a third door opened expressly for any operator, for example African, who can show, based on scientific principles, that under the conditions of preparation and offer to the consumer, his product can be considered healthy.

On another level, and vis-à-vis the law, the FSMA has put the status of the importer at the same level as that of the American producer. One is responsible for the products prepared in his unit and the other is responsible for the product he imports from a foreign unit. In other words, the FSMA considers the responsibility of these two types of players in the US agri-food sector to be identical because the two players offer products under the same conditions to the American consumer. It is therefore up to the importer to take the appropriate measures to ensure the quality of products manufactured in the unit of the foreign country, source of its supply. The bright side of this law is that it facilitates the work of our exporters by assigning them a single representative, namely their importing partner in the US market.

So, with the application of the FSMA, trade is becoming much more fluid and direct sales to the American consumer is now at hand of African operators, especially Moroccans. The entire philosophy of the FSMA’s work is built on the prevention of all risks, in HACCP or outside HACCP (in so-called prerequisite programs) to avoid materialization of such a risk, making the product for sale dangerous for the consumer. This is, in short, the distension of HACCP which suddenly becomes HARPC (Hazard Analysis Risk-Based Preventive Control).

Good luck to exporters of our agri-food sector.

Expertise

ONSSA in ignorance of the law

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

We had, some time ago, treated in an article of the “Amateurism of the ONSSA” on the occasion a file we had dealt with a little over three years ago.

A few weeks ago, an importer submitted his complaints to the ONSSA (National Office for Sanitary Safety of Food Products) following the blockage, and confirmation of refoulement, of its shipment of green tea imported from China. We will examine this file, received for expertise by my Cabinet, which will show us that instead of learning from their mistakes to progress like anyone else, ONSSA on the contrary seems amnesic and, as time goes by, sinks deeper into mediocrity.

After several unsuccessful approaches to the ONSSA in question, the company MARTEAPACK asked us, dated July 11, to assess if their imported green tea from China, actually blocked at the port of Agadir since April 27, is conforming to Moroccan law enforced by ONSSA

Document 1

We then wrote to ONSSA asking them to kindly inform us of the regulatory elements that support the blockage in question.

Document 2

The organization then sent MARTEAPACK a note (undated) on behalf of the Director General ONSSA, signed by Mr. Zakaria Abdelkader, Director of the Department of Control and Protection at ONSSA.

Document 3

The note of the Director General, which refers to a request of MARTEAPACK of June 8th (see below under exegesis), states that the blockage is dictated by the presence in the tea of the insecticide “Triazophos” at the concentration of 0.03 mg / kg in a sample of the goods controlled by the LOARC (Official Laboratory for Analysis and Chemical Research) in Casablanca, but sampled in Agadir by an unidentified third party.

Document 4

At the same time, Mr. Zakaria’s note closed the door on a possible second check (contradictory expertise) requested by MARTEAPACK.

In parallel, and after a fortnight of waiting for a response to our note (Document 2), we made a reminder fax dated July 26th.

Document 5

As a response, ONSSA sends (the same day) directly to MARTEAPACK a “Certificate of Control” carrying for all information a stamp of “Not Accepted” of the goods (see below under exegesis).

Document 6

We then write a warning note about ONSSA’s unorthodox practices that we hand-deliver to ONSSA and the Ministry of Agriculture as the Supervisory Authority.

Document 7

Document 8

The next day (July 27th), the customs services of Agadir called the forwarding agent of MARTEAPACK to inform him of refoulement action taken by ONSSA. Also, MARTEAPACK should inform Customs immediately of their preference for the incineration or reshipment of the “non-admitted” green tea batch. Distraught, the boss of the company calls me urgently for opinion. In our turn, we give our appreciation in a note on these unorthodox practices of ONSSA that we communicate to the President of MARTEAPACK for delivery to his lawyers. MARTEAPACK finally opted to hand over our note to ONSSA.

Document 9

Exegesis

The LOARC Analysis Bulletin

An analytical document that does not provide information on the method used for laboratory determinations, supported by appropriate and accepted scientific references, that does not give the degree of uncertainty of the measurements, not make a conclusion on the work done and does not show the name and the quality of the person who signs it, which seems to be the case of the truncated document of LOARC (Document 4) cannot correctly claim for qualification as Bulletin of Analyzes.

The maximum residue limit of Triazophos that would be accepted in the case of tea, or an assimilated food, is not included either.

So, for us, it is a document that does not live up to what is normally referred to as an Analysis Bulletin and, as a result, is not reliable to attest with confidence of the presence of Triazophos and / or the estimation of the concentration attributed to this insecticide in the lot of tea.

Note from the Director General ONSSA

The note in question (Document 3), which must have justified the “Certificate” of non-admission of the goods (Document 6), deserves a moment’s pause to recall that the advent of the law 28- 07 of food safety in 2010 was to be followed, 18 months after its entry into force, with the definitive repeal of Law 13-83 (previous law), including its chapter on the repression of fraud. Nevertheless (see our archives), the ONSSA still uses, a little à la carte, the chapter of the repression of the frauds of the repealed law 13-83 whenever this organization wishes it. But, while the chapter of the repression of the frauds, always in application, provides for the possibility of a second expertise to the applicant on his request, Mr. Zakaria answers no! (Document 3). To specify that the services of the ONSSA of Agadir refused to accuse (on June 8, 2018) reception of the note of request of MARTEAPACK for a second analysis, obliging the company to simply fill a printed form (see under object of Document 3), which was refused a copy of them as a discharge. To justify his refusal of a contradictory expert analysis, Mr. Zakaria argues that “the goods have been controlled according to the regulations in force“! We do not know if by speaking so ambiguously, Mr. Zakaria means that sometimes their services control but “non-regulatory”!

Also, knowing that the responsibility on the control is one and indivisible and that, moreover, the control of a cargo of such an importance (about fifty thousand kilos of tea) must relate to several samples distributed on all of this commodity (pre-established sampling plan) with determination in the analysis of an average and an experimental deviation not included in the LOARC Truncated Bulletin, the control to which ONSSA refers is, in our opinion, everything except regulatory and, in the absence of other details, it is therefore, for us, null and void.

On another level, it is worth recalling that since the introduction of the so-called “Delaney clause” in the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation of 1958, which has inspired many countries around the world, it is accepted that if a chemical element is recognized as potentially carcinogenic, it must not be found, whatever the concentration, in any food whatsoever. The Triazophos must escape this rule since only its concentration (0.03mg / kg) is questioned (Document 3) by ONSSA. But in this case, we ignore the accepted threshold for estimating the degree of transgression of the Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) and Mr. Zakaria provides no information on this. This did not prevent his subordinate, Mr. Mustapha Rami ONSSA Agadir, decreeing the refoulement of the cargo of tea (Document 6) on the basis of that determination whereas we do not even know if a threshold value of the insecticide was actually exceeded in this commodity.

All this makes their mentioned «Certificate» simply a junk paper thousands far of light years from a responsible work done correctly.

At the time of writing this article, the national press echoes the revitalization of the free trade agreement signed between Morocco and the United States planned to enter into force in 2006 already. While His Majesty King Mohammed VI gave his instructions in his last Speech from the Throne for the Moroccan Administration to respond to professionals within a period of not more than one month, it is these ONSSA officials, experts proven Procrastination, who will be the contact partners of the FDA. In this respect, the FDA always, once it has blocked a commodity at the entrance of the US market, displays besides the blocking the reason set out in the law that motivated the blockage and invites the owner of the goods or his agent, to explain to the FDA.

Document 10

With the new Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), being implemented recently by FDA, the US has gone a long way in easing FDA administrative rules and, at the same time, empowering the private sector to streamline the flow of the food trade. This gives the private sector extra work. And, of course, this will require more time for operators that they will not be willing to sacrifice simply in trips to satisfy the extravagances of ONSSA as was the case for the managers of MARTEAPACK, and we too, with displacements between Dakhla, Agadir, Casablanca and Rabat. These kinds of movements do not benefit operators but take time, money, energy simply as a result of Procrastination and the poor work of ONSSA.

In this respect, the dialogue that needs to take place between our officials here and those of the FDA on the other side of the Atlantic will certainly be interesting to follow.

Non classé

FDA helping African agribusiness SMEs

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

Recently, the US Federal Agency for Food and Drugs (FDA) has put in place on its dedicated portal, under the heading: “Water Activity / Formulation Control Method“, a procedure to facilitate, at the same time accelerate, the recordings for the export of food products, particularly African, to the American market from which they were practically excluded before.

To better appreciate the colossal importance of this masterful opening of the US market in our direction, we will go back a bit to remind you how the export operations are towards the EU market, with France as a gateway privileged entry, as far as we are concerned in Morocco and French-speaking Africa, and compare this way of doing things, European now, with what is now the norm for the access of our operators to the US market. The reasoning will be simplified to extend the understanding also to the uninitiated reader.

In the aftermath of World War II, metropolitan France no longer had the financial means and no longer, following its humiliating occupation by Germany, the Aura to prolong the colonization of much of our continent. So she played the watch and worked twice as hard to replace armed colonialism with an economic enslavement on her “former colonies”, which is cheaper and less flagrant. Being recognized as an agricultural power, France naturally seeks to perpetuate its monopoly on this type of wealth of the African continent, the French-speaking zone in the first place. At the forefront of these countries is of course Morocco, from which we will draw some lessons to illustrate the Machiavellianism of the doctrine of “help and assistance” that the metropolis argues with our African leaders.

Under the guise of setting up instruments to boost the export of Morocco, France has created the organization that has taken the current name of Autonomous Establishment of Coordination and Control of Exports (EACCE). In other words, we recognize the Moroccans the freedom to manufacture and trade at will on their home market, but the task is for the EACCE to ensure that what is exported to France, and can be redistributed later in Europe and beyond, must be controlled and validated by this state interface, according to French standards it goes without saying. Given the workings that the Colonial Administration has set up for the Moroccan Administration (subordinate), this gives it many levers to intervene to “defend” the so called “mixed-interests” of the “Franco-Moroccan” couple beginning by draping the EACCE of the credibility which is lent to him for his services in favor of the metropolis. At the same time, the work of this body is closely monitored so that it does not deviate from the path that was previously traced to it, that is, to encourage “deserving” operators (faithful to French standards) and to discreetly discourage all those who have the desire to export elsewhere than in Europe (my archives). It follows that our export of agricultural and agri-food products go mainly in France, part of the merchandise is then re-exported to other places including the US market. And the important part of the surplus value goes to the French intermediaries obviously. In this regard, after the change in US regulations, operated following the World Trade Center attack in September 2001, allowing the FDA to post the Processor’s name instead (as the case was before) the  name of second-hand supplier, several French intermediaries have seen their profitable business, relating to their windfall economy, laid bare without their will (my archives).

We are in our Mediterranean region victims of a paradox. On the one hand, the area is known worldwide for a highly valued diet and specialists use it to highlight the high-profile features that characterize our region in the form of correct average longevity, low obesity, reduced number of cardiovascular diseases etc. But, on the commercial aspect we have, on this side of the Mediterranean, a lot of trouble valuing this wealth in the globalized market. The reason, in my opinion, is that the intermediaries mentioned above, and their mentors, have painted a bleak picture of our quality control systems. They then took advantage of this bad propaganda, which they are at the origin, to establish themselves as a hub of the African raw materials trade at our expense. We have been reduced, for centuries now, and it continues, to sell them our bulk products for peanuts. Under these conditions, by agreeing to expand US market access to products shaped for our local markets, the FDA is making a great gesture of generosity to us and at the same time trusting in our own skills. Indeed, once an African operator registers its product on the dedicated interface of the FDA, the program immediately notifies the approval on its “Process” composed, according to the  FDA jargon, of the “FCE” (Food Canning Establishment) relating to the location of the company and the “SID” (Submission Identifier) ​​specific to each product. This FCE / SID code represents the key that allows a foreign company as well as an American one to offer its product according to the rules on the American market and which the customers need to order. Alternatively, these elements can be given to the EACCE to, inter alia, expedite the work of these officials and save time and money (my archives).

Thus, by accepting that the African operators, who normally work on the national agri-food sector as far as Morocco is concerned, register their products themselves directly on the FDA interface, without agent or intermediary, the FDA puts balm at heart of African operators by trusting them and at the same time make them understand that from now on they can trade directly with the American buyers for a better selling price than what is being offered to them by speculators mentioned above.

Looking more closely, this administrative flexibility towards us by the FDA is likely to strengthen the free trade agreement concluded in 2006 between Morocco and the US and remained until now without effect on our bilateral trade in the agro-industrial field. But the Americans, in giving us an opportunity to promote our export to the US market, must logically expect reciprocal treatment; that is to say, sell a little more their products here. And this is where the rub is because the Moroccan market, like that of all of West Africa, is saturated with European products mostly French. This is due in large part to our very lax habits about French and / or European regulations. In this regard, it is worth recalling that the recent US-EU friction on customs duties has had the merit of revealing dissensions hitherto well hidden within the EU. If the Germans are to seek a compromise with the US, the French are categorically opposed. This comes, according to German explanations, from the French visceral fear that the agreement with the Americans comes to include the component of the agricultural products which would be the death knell for the French agro-alimentary hegemony in Europe and in Africa. A forceful battle is in perspective.

In any case, the US and the EU are used to finding solutions to the imbroglios that oppose them. Let’s try ourselves, here in Africa, to take advantage of the promising and sincere American offer that the FDA makes available to us for the benefit of our SMEs and agri-food cooperatives.

 

Expertise/News

Africa on time of “Dollar – Euro” friction

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

Just twenty years after the end of the Second World War, a visitor, unprejudiced, could reasonably deduce, by comparing his impressions of the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic, that it was France that had lost the war against Germany. Over a relatively short period of time, thanks to a robust American assistance, Germany quickly recovered and settled comfortably, with a well done work and more productivity than its neighbors, in the chair of industrial leader undisputed at the level of Europe. It exported undeniably more than it imported with each of them what would normally have been source of Germanic enthusiasm. Except that, at regular intervals, the neighbors in question “managed” to spoil this pleasure by carrying out repetitive devaluations of their currencies which, in addition to being disappointing, trimmed on the profit margins of German companies. This recurring continental frustration was, so to speak, the norm in German-European trade relations until the end of the eighties of the last century. Apart from taking expensive insurance on this type of risk, there was no other way to avert it. With the fall of the Berlin Wall, which put an end to the Cold War with the Soviet Union, a promising new commercial era seemed to be emerging for all the countries of Western Europe. The idea of a common currency was then timely to arrange everyone. France, and other Latin countries, allowing them to hide the relative weakness of their industrial performance and Germany to settle once and for all the risks associated with the exchange rate.

But, very quickly, the caciques of the countries concerned by the new currency saw there a potential use otherwise more ambitious. Make it a competitor of the Dollar. Perhaps even, it was said, replace the American currency as the first reserve currency at the international level. In this respect, if the other European countries were envious of German performances in the real economy, the Germans had eyes only for the Americans. Thus, towards the end of the seventy years, the German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt predicted, around the year two thousand German exports up to 95% will be done in the service sector to go ahead of the US in this area. The use of a common currency, managed by Germany, was finally in the same direction of the logic of this forecast. But if, until now, the circulation of the Euro has strengthened Germany’s leadership in the industrial sector, the country has not been able to make the promised breakthrough on the international services sector where the United States continues to prance in front of everyone to the great Germanic regret. Peer Steinbrück, the time when he was Minister of Finance in the first government of Angela Merkel, attributed the US performance, particularly in the services sector, largely in the “Dollar effect.” Mr. Steinbrück compared the American currency to a hoover that was capturing 70% of global savings. In other words, EU must first make people dependent on the “Euro” as the US did for the Dollar, but on two centuries time interval, and it will become possible for the Bloc to sell all that he desires. And of course they thought they could do it quickly.

Along the way, after the banking and financial crisis of 2008, the Europeans have emboldened, overriding all the reserves of the IMF, where they have, given their number, a lever comparable to the US, to create their “local IMF” Provisionally called the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), which since 2012 has undertaken the repurchase of bad debts (or doubtful debts), that is to say, having little chance of being forever repaid, issued, to one title or another, both by the States and by the private sector of the EU, against fresh money denominated in Euro. Clearly, the European Central Bank has simply resorted to printing money in favor, ultimately, of all European citizens. But this money, we can imagine, ends up for good part landing at home in Africa and is used by opportunists for the purchase of real goods such as Raw Materials, Hotels, Farms and allows these people to regain their economic health at our expense. Better still, with money coming from kind of “printing houses”, these people buy our Moroccan and other African companies and make us work in these factories as they please. So, even if there is no gunboat in this case, the principle of colonization is all the same.

In fact, the desire to establish European preeminence over African trade has not changed since the end of the physical colonization of Africa. In 2007, following the writing of an article in a national newspaper, where I came back on the dependence of our export on the French market, I received in my inbox, just after, a message convoluted (always stored in my archives), sent by an individual from a French Ministry’ site, suggesting that Morocco remained a DOM-TOM type structure (Overseas Department, Overseas Territory). The message is sufficiently clear in the sense that, as colonized Africans, we must accept our fate of “Independence in Dependency”. Moreover, in Morocco or elsewhere in Africa, when almost all of our income comes from the sale of our raw materials in bulk, the means are obviously lacking to us to do and / or act like other free countries in the world.

That said, the continuation, after World War II, of European having a stranglehold on Africa’s wealth is likely to have something to do with a “balance” dictated by the Cold War, which is now part of the history. A whole continent at the mercy of the EU is no longer justified by the current state of affairs. This is all the more so since, while Europe has played a major role in shaping the world in previous times, it produces and / or innovates little, compared to others, in today’s world to keep privileges and / or prerogatives of the past. And that is part of substance of the message that President Trump, and he is not the only one, is trying to make them understand and which is giving them a lot of concern.

On this, and reading between the lines, it seems that a consensus has developed among the EU’s trade opponents internationally. Namely, the project of the common currency and other structures that cement the countries of the EU seem to be a semi-finished job, see sloppy. Therefore, the explanation of the apparent success of the European Group (high standard of living) must be elsewhere. They have put in place sophisticated mechanisms, standards, protocols, practices and other means worthy of small people oriented primarily to the countries of the south to perpetuate their privileges in these markets. Their competitors, Chinese and American in particular, are not fooled and, for considerations the latters must know, the task has returned to President Trump to show the EU the place it deserves from now on. The United States and China seem indeed able to do without trade with the EU. And if they develop their business with Africa, our Continent will also be able to do without the EU, the Euro or the CFA Franc. Europeans can, of course, continue to thrive in trade on the northern shores of the Mediterranean while trying to find new artifices to continue living beyond their own means.

But, let get back to our Continent and the purpose of this article. We must realize that the organizations set up after the Second World War, to codify the diplomatic and trade relations between countries, are at the twilight of their lives and must be changed. Africa, by setting up its Continental Free Trade Area, will soon be ready to contribute to the implementation of the new alternative structures which will have to take into consideration the own needs of our Continent and its population. Measures will, for example, have to be rid of norms and other artificial clauses such as “precautionary principles” set up temporarily to settle permanently. Also, when it comes to investments, people who want to cooperate with our countries should commit to valuing our raw materials here in Africa and adhere to principle of technology transfer. African standards, which remain to be done, will also have to be taken into account in commercial transactions with other regions of the world.

Non classé

The Euroxit

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

At school, we are taught that Europe was built on the cultural and artistic foundations of Greece on one side and Roman law on the other. In the background, Europe would then be a pure autodidact, having undergone no external influence, from Asia or elsewhere, for knowledge or culture. The fact of having self-designated old continent beautifies even more this image by suggesting the know-how in the surrounding areas derives exclusively from Europe itself. The message is intended primarily to the Middle East / Africa. In short, we should be grateful to the Europeans for taking us under their protective wings and learning what we know. The story has been told to all generations before us and continues to be repeated unceasingly. It is therefore hardly surprising to find people, also among the intellectual elite of our African countries, who believe that the Europeans, the French as far as our great continental region is concerned, have occupied us (and may continue) in a perfectly altruistic approach to help our development and our insertion in the modern world. After centuries of occupation, the result is without appeal in the form of a GDP of the whole African continent, among the richest of the Planet, lower than that of a small country like South Korea. It is a small country, practically without resources on its own soil, which imports two-thirds of its food needs. It was first pulled out of black poverty in the fifties of the last century, then effectively assisted by an American presence to become a Dragon now in terms of broad ranges of technologies and industrial products that it exports all over the world and all of that in in fifty years’ time.

Closer to home, there is the example of Israel (and this article does not approach the political / diplomatic aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian question). This country, very tiny by all the geographical standards, which displays a GDP equivalent to half of the African Continent, worked miracles, among others, on the agronomic and agribusiness, on a soil of mediocre quality and with extremely water resources reduced. They innovated in the field of drip irrigation, in the fight against pests, in the production of plant varieties adapted to the arid climate and in the mass production of poultry meat making the price of chicken available to a large segment of the low-income population. On the purely commercial subject, the Europeans, with their own confession, consider Israel as a formidable adversary. It follows they are apprehensive, on this plane, of the day when the Jewish state will reconcile with its Arab neighbors and, why not, with Iran even in the future. They fear losing a large part of their Middle Eastern clientele, who will prefer Israeli technology (to which the Palestinian elite among the Arab population contributed their share), cheaper and more appropriate. But they fear even more such a rapprochement may spread to our continent which would represent a real cataclysm on their juicy African business.

This scenario, regarded with astonishment by EU businessmen, is taken more and more seriously by European states to which it gives cold sweats. Until recently, despite the entry on the African scene of new economic players such as China, India, Japan, Turkey and others, the mainland’s trade with the outside world, which is mainly based on the sale of raw materials First and the purchase of corresponding Finished Products, continued to be managed without share by big companies of the EU thanks to a skillfully studied mesh of “international” standards made by the Europeans, for the Europeans. All of these aggressively supported, relentless efforts are presented, on the marketing side, in “regulatory” forms to facilitate their acceptance by African leaders. This includes the reference to codex standards and WTO regulations where European became masters in their exploitation for their benefit. But now, without going so far as to name them, United States actually considers that the organs of the WTO have been recovered by Europeans and others, against the US interests and show their intention to ignore these multilateral organizations which have been diverted from their original missions. This unprecedented shift in the US position vis-à-vis these multilateral forums, which must have played a role in the US withdrawal from the Iran deal, sounds like a tocsin in the ears of EU officials. They receive this as the appearance of a major opponent to their age-old ambition to expand the privileges (in the course of implementation) they have acquired over Africa and the Middle East to others regions of the planet. US opposition, unexpected, to that ambition, will result, and the Europeans are not mistaken, in a fast shrinking of the spatial influence of the EU in its environment. It is more than likely that the Israelis would play a role in the event of a regression, which appears more and more inescapable, of the influence of EU in its immediate neighborhood. The Europeans feel it and it annoys them to the highest degree. Because in such a case, the Euro would not have any more reason to be and, of course, the CFA Franc either what would bring the countries of the EU to the situation of each for himself. This prospect will particularly please the members of the current Italian government who have been calling for this solution for some time now.

But the EU / US standoff is just beginning with a first deadline on June 1 where President Trump is preparing to impose new tariffs on steel and aluminum imported from the EU. He spoke the same language to China, which agreed to quickly engage in dialogue (currently under way) to resolve the trade imbalance between the two countries. On European side, this imbalance formally concerns all the countries of the Union and the EU would like it to be managed by the European Commission. Usually, its President defines a mission and has it validated by the Council of Heads of States before appointing an interlocutor to conduct negotiations within limits set beforehand. Moreover, the negotiator in question may return to the Commission whenever necessary to advance the dialogue. This supposes several rounds of negotiations with, between two, validations with the hierarchy which is a bit reminiscent of the Soviet empire where the time spent for this kind of meeting didn’t matter. But this European practice is still applied when it comes to negotiations that the “European Empire” conducts separately with our African countries. As we have, as far as we are concerned, little or no alternative to the rapid sale of our Commodities, we are generally not able to keep the distance for the negotiations with the EU and we often accept what the EU agrees to give us in return for our perishable goods. It is unlikely, however, that this “old continent” approach to dealings will be applicable to negotiations with the US administration. In these conditions, except theatrical event, the chances are high that the imposition of tariffs on European steel and aluminum will come into effect next June.

There is still a considerable uncertainty: The tariffs in question penalize, more than any other, the German industry in its heart, namely the automobile industry and do not touch the French industry that have no such steelworks in activity. The pressure on Germany is likely to be of the same intensity as when President Mitterrand negotiated France’s support for German reunification against the adoption of the single currency. Today, it is neither more nor less than to come to the rescue of the first German industry that has already suffered several severe blows and needs to regain its bearings. If Germany decides to take back the Deutschemark, its favorite currency, the “Germixit” will be equivalent to a “Euroxit”

Africa should, by the time these gladiators are busy settling their accounts, move forward its African Continental Free Trade Area project to take the lead. In this case, as in others, one is never so well served as by oneself.

Expertise/News

Africa decides to step onto the big stage

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

In the years following the Second World War, an American employee who flew away for a month off in Europe could, on his way home, realize that he had saved money, compared to what he would have spent if he had stayed at home. America was then responsible for 50% of world trade. Many things have changed in the meantime, but the institutions of then, IMF and World Bank among others, are still the pillars that support the international exchange of a world that is no longer the same. The GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), renamed WTO (World Trade Organization) by the 1995 Marrakesh Agreement, is one of those multilateral treaties set up in the forties of the past century. The latter is mandated by the Power of Settlement of Commercial Disputes between States. At the time, America, the first power on all levels, had to be assured, in the event of a third-party dispute brought before the latter, that it had enough good cards to win a dispute hands down. This insurance, on which Americans have relied to promote global trade liberalization, is apparently out of date today. As evidence, this March’s USTR report states : “the WTO is undermining our country’s ability to act in its national interest … First among those concerns is that the WTO dispute settlement system has appropriated to itself powers that the WTO Members never intended to give it.”

The recriminations are deep, come from far and are illustrated, among others, in the agri-food sectors. For the settlement of disputes relating to these products, the WTO refers to the standards of the Codex Alimentarius. For several considerations, treated here and there in various articles of this blog, the EU has, as Bloc, ensured the control over norms codification within the workings of the Codex where they never forget to create loopholes, like the sacrosanct “Precautionary Principle“, which they do not hesitate to use as a Veto whenever they fear to be inferior in scientific terms.

Seen in this light, the EU has made itself invincible by the clever use of Codex rules. The other countries could not do anything against that. If we add to this the fact that the EU speaks on behalf of “28 + 1”, while each country has one voice, it is easy to imagine that standards (tools necessary for the WTO) must be blessed by  EU if they are to succeed before any multilateral commission. This also irritates considerably and not only Americans. And, this is one of the reasons that led to the failure of the Doha Round and the difficult situation in which the WTO is now, ready to implode.

The foregoing helps to understand to a large extent the dependence of many African countries on the single European market. Indeed, many standards that allow access to the EU are carefully designed for this unique market. But to sell in other global markets, African operators must prepare under other rules and that’s where the shoe pinches. Indeed, the risk is to see their products, the next attempt to export to the “Bloc-European” market, refused for a reason “out of suspicion”. When the EU market, which absorbs seventy percent of your production, closes in front of you, it is indeed a mortal risk that nobody wants to take. Especially as the African operators go in scattered ranks (see below) and are therefore more vulnerable. The net result is a de facto and uncompromising monopoly of the EU over the wealth of the African continent.

As long as the EU seeks to remain firmly attached to what it considers to be its own (African market), for which it has developed a visceral attachment for centuries, there is little that we can do ourselves as African citizens to unravel this conundrum. But, the current standoff between the enemy brothers, EU and US, about the rules of trade, may bring a beginning solution. For considerations that the Americans have explained, they have introduced a new tax on steel and aluminum imports that will penalize EU exports to the big US market. America has also put in place exemption formulas for operators and / or individual countries that wish to do so. But the EU is keen on a definitive, immediate and unrequited exemption for all Bloc countries, which Americans are reluctant to grant them. The possibility of seeing this provisionally delayed taxation for the moment seems to be favored. As there is no precedent for this imbroglio, it is difficult to guess what will be next. Used to treating small African countries as it sees fit, the EU has finally found an opponent this time.

However, the most striking fact of the international scene today is the signature last Wednesday in Kigali (Rwanda), by 80% of the States (44) of our Continent, of a historic agreement, concerning the establishment of an African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). This goes in the direction of the adage that “One is never better served than by oneself”. Soon, this will allow for a “Bloc-to-Bloc” dialogue with the EU to remedy the current flagrant asymmetry that governs trade between our countries and those on the northern shore of the Mediterranean. In the meantime, it will be necessary to put in place the human and technical instruments to establish the credibility we need vis-à-vis our neighbors to the North. This will provide the robust expertise needed to defend the quality of our processed foods and their export profitably, for our operators and consumers, in the globalized market. The AEFS (www.aefs.africa) will, we hope all, be called upon to play a role in this aim for the strengthening of African-African expertise.

Needless to say, the aforementioned Trans-African Free Trade Project, a courageous and unprecedented initiative, is a unique opportunity that our leaders must seize to satisfy the Spanish saying: « la suerte golpea la puerta una vez, no debes dejarla escaparn » (Luck knocks on the door once, you should not let it escape).

Expertise

The Germixit

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

At the end of the Second World War, and the defeat of the Third Reich, the Americans found themselves faced with a tough choice: Considering that West Germany, unlike France, is not self-sufficient in agri-food, if she was left to her fate in the execrable conditions where she was, that would have been a gift to the soviet bloc of then and the Americans did not want this choice. The second option, retained by the Americans, was to move towards a robust stowage of Germany in the US, while being aware of the exorbitant financial cost of this operation (Marshall Plan) for the American people who had just completed the war. For the next forty-five years, the Americans’ relationship with the Germans was so intense and reciprocal that, at times, it made envy Britain, a traditional ally of the Americans. By comparison, the Americans did not make any special effort to help the British get out of their financial stagnation of the seventies, a constraint that has, among other things, pushed Britain into the arms of Continental Europe.

During the period mentioned, the export of the Federal Republic of Germany to the USA broke records and, for their part, American companies preferred to domicile their subsidiaries and / or representations for Europe, Africa and Middle East and North Africa (MENA) in Germany rather than Britain. It was the golden age of US-German relations that ended with the new configuration of the EU and the entry into force of the Euro in the nineties of the last century.

But if, during this prosperous period, the Germans excelled in exporting to the US market, they were far from doing as well in their export to the markets of their immediate neighborhood. In the latter case, countries, particularly France, Italy and Spain, did not hesitate to devalue their currencies to maintain their intra-European market shares or in the MENA zone and in Africa, in the face of the German competition. The lever of the devaluation, then freely used by the southern states of Europe, was a source of crippling financial losses for German exports and impossible to predict since it depended on the political will of sovereign countries. The « Made in Germany » was therefore powerless against these hazards that gave recurrent cold sweats to German operators.

This competition, internal to the old continent, was, however, beneficial for operators in Africa and elsewhere. If it is true that the Germans, who do not hide it, consider France, not speaking of Italy or Spain, as a poor competitor for them, they were nevertheless obliged to review their prices if they wanted to sell at Morocco or elsewhere in Africa. In the other direction, an exporter from our continent kept a minimum of room for maneuver and could, if not satisfied with a transaction on a first European country, offer his product for sale in another country on the northern Mediterranean shore. This was the case in particular for the export of canned sardines where the safety standards were different from one European country to another.

With the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, relations between Germany and the US, which until then had been highly privileged, began to decline and, after the entry into force of the Euro, to deteriorate further. In this vein, a historian witness of the time told me that after the speech of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in December 1941, asking the US Congress to declare war on the Empire of Japan, following the surprise attack of Pearl Harbor, people expected to see the American soldiers leave the next day to fight with the Japanese. On the contrary, the Americans first began by building weapons factories in the center of the country because, as they said, we know when we are entering a war but we do not know when the war will end, so we have to prepare well. It is therefore possible that, once again, the Americans have prepared for a long financial and commercial confrontation with Germany, Guardian of the Euro. In this respect, the blow of the “dieselgate” is a master stroke if one considers the brutal, deep but well-founded tarnishing of the more than 100-year-old reputation of the flagship of the Germanic industry, namely the German car.

Then, to the extent that Uncle Sam, through the voice of its current president, considers that the Euro poses a serious risk to US economy, it is not excluded that other harmful revelations on the « Made in Germany » emerge in the future, further damaging the country’s overall reputation. In fact, the new configuration of the EU, with instrumentalization of the Euro, poses an even greater risk to the African economy, creating a de facto European monopoly on the continent’s wealth without us Africans, unlike the US, have any suitable means at our disposal to defend ourselves.

But, the Germans must surely be aware of the risk that will weigh more on them if the German-American relations were to continue to deteriorate. Nowadays, the Germans face, in their turn, a tough choice: Germany can choose to maintain the status quo, which has allowed it to generate colossal trade surpluses which it is reluctant to share with other EU countries. But in this case, in addition to external recriminations, which aim to isolate Germany, coming from Russia, Turkey, China and others, there will be  the growing frustration of its partners of the EU to stigmatize it within of the Union. The second, more sensible option is to listen to the German people whom the late Chancellor Helmut Kohl forced to adopt the Euro against their will, and to return to a situation of appeasement with the US, Germany’s traditional godfather of the after war era. It will also placate us in Africa by giving us a minimum of leeway to sell our products at fair prices in markets outside Africa.

 

Expertise/News

The Afrixit

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

In the seventies, and in the eighties, the diplomatic and business relations of European countries with the Gulf monarchies in particular, and MENA zone (Middle East and North Africa) in general, were still strong , fluids and continuous. Oil money was flowing and did allow for many companies, German in the first place, growing in record time in large companies playing internationally. It seems reasonable to think that the United States played a facilitating role for such investments. Indeed, tensions were highest during this Cold War period and the Americans had to ensure the continued assent of German officials, and they had it, on their policy of containment of the Soviet Union in Central Europe through, inter alia, the installation of medium-range nuclear weapons on German soil. Both parties found their account.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the reunification of the country, Germany, which lost its greatness in the war, naturally expected to find it financially and commercially, as the first European industrial power in Europe, reigning directly over Europe and by weighing on the trade of neighboring countries, including Turkey and Russia and, by countries interposed, notably France, on the African continent. The Euro should be the ideal instrument to achieve this end. Nevertheless, as President Trump has bluntly acknowledged, the Americans have considered, and still do, the launch of the single European currency as an unprecedented existential danger on the Dollar and, after assessing the repercussions, have begun to act accordingly.

Thus, after the war in Iraq, which cost, according to President Trump, trillions of dollars in the US, and the war in Syria added to it, this environment of proximity to European countries has undergone irreversible changes. The usual diplomatic and commercial anchoring points of continental European powers in this area have either been destroyed or seriously damaged. As a result, EU trade activity in the region has shrunk considerably. The monarchies of the Gulf, released without much damage from the Iraq-Syria war, have in turn printed new directions to their trade with the world that no longer seem to favor the EU countries. For example, if Saudi Arabia concluded on 2017 several hundred billion dollars in commercial contracts with countries like China, Japan and the United States, Germany is returned, it is a first, the pockets empty after moving Angela Merkel last spring to the Wahhabi country. Trade with Russia and Turkey has also been badly damaged and the situation in Ukraine is far from being a solvent customer for the moment.

But while the EU’s diplomatic, political and, even more, trade-related influence has suffered a historic downturn on its eastern flank, Europe seems to be more firmly tied to Africa than ever before. The EU remotely manages in Africa the bulk of economic, financial and commercial activity and the Euro is King directly, or indirectly when, for example, the value of the Franc of the French Colonies of Africa (CFA) is guaranteed by the European currency. Major European service providers, SGS, Bureau VERITAS, TÜV Rheinland and Intertetek, the best known, crisscross the Continent and maintain a firm hand on the commercial transactions of our countries represented mainly by the sale of raw materials of agricultural origin and the import of commodities. In this respect, the requirements, related to the Accompaniment and Certification Process, studied in detail and refined, allow these ubiquitous behemoths, in addition to being highly paid, to have access to all the information they want; which they use to consolidate their current positions and to perpetuate their privileges, that they have wrested from the different countries, on the continental African market. Their historic colonial roots, which allow them unparalleled knowledge of the terrain and African practices, added to a multitude of standards, health security and others, tailored appropriately to promote the position of European companies in the face of competition, make the EU, for the moment, a “virtual” actor unmovable for any country wishing to invest in Africa.

However, if the “Brexit” could be done, there is no reason to consider that the “Euro-interest” marriage that Europe has forced on the African continent is indissoluble. Trade and diplomatic relations existed between African countries and with the Middle East area well before the colonial era. This has also been the case in Morocco with the southern Sahara countries. The whole thing is to know how to put these relations back to order and to the necessities of the day by allowing a better perspective for the development of the African skills to enable them to play the role which is theirs on the international chessboard.

It is nevertheless a difficult task, to be led by mutual agreement, which must be taken very seriously. The countries, our neighbors to the south, have countless natural sources of wealth, particularly in terms of agricultural resources. If Morocco wants to take a more active part in the African (agro) industrial take-off, a top priority for all of us, it will have to improve the offer of its assistance and redouble its efforts. For example, Africa spends more than 20 per cent of its revenues annually in foreign currency in order to comply with the requirements of Europe’s expertises, of which the agro-industrial sector has the lion’s share. Much of this money is channeled through the organizations mentioned, which date back to the colonial era, and others that have recently been added, all of which benefit from support, more or less discreet, but very broad and on all plans from their respective home countries.

But as the saying goes, well-ordered Charity begins with oneself. Indeed, if Morocco wants its offer of aid and assistance for an African market upgrading to be taken seriously by the brotherly African countries; it must enforce such principles at home in the first place. For example, it is anomalous that a “renown” European provider, who has made a breakthrough on a certification niche, offers, against payment, certification documents for a few days using. This type of “grocery certification” (our archives) is simply outrageous. Other practices of sleight-of-hand, designed by these people to issue health safety documents that bypass Law 28-07 (our archives), are just as repulsive but still exist. The immediate conclusion to be drawn from these actions, which border on fraudulent behavior, is the disregard of these providers for our national laws and regulations. The question that naturally comes to mind is: Why are our supervisory authorities not reacting? The officials concerned give the impression of having been anesthetized by these European providers. In fact, the credibility of our supervisory bodies, which they would do better to think of improving, must probably have been provided by auditors of the same kind as the providers mentioned above. Maybe this explains that.

Non classé

Africa or the last colonial continent

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

Among the important points that are regularly referred to in order to characterize the inefficiency of private sector activity in our country is the difficulty of recovering payment due for merchandise sold or service rendered. Even that, in many cases, hideous operators has made it a business. They are encouraged in this by judicial slowness and / or its inefficiency which repels the creditors to ask to have their payment by way of justice and sometimes even give up to claim. There are somewhat similar difficulties in terms of international trade for our African countries. In fact, in the case of food products, the WTO, the international regulatory body, refers to the Codex Alimentarius for its role of arbitration of disputes, a principle that everyone agrees with. But, the process is cumbersome, very expensive and extremely slow which contravenes the dynamics of profitable trade. Moreover, the experts who can investigate such cases are in the northern hemisphere as well as the “authorities empowered to recognize them”. It is therefore understandable that, despite the many cases of gross and documented trade injustices from EU countries to African countries, none of our States dares to litigate in the WTO.

Some object to this finding by arguing that commercial transactions are the prerogative of private operators whose goods are themselves certified by private providers. They are not wrong about form, but alongside a few providers who simply do the work that is asked of them, the reality is much more complex. The food trade, from south to north, is now hostage to thousands of texts and standards, the number of which is increasing year by year. Unless it is perfectly naive, it is difficult to adhere to the assumption that all this deluge of standards, the majority of which is produced by the EU, has for its sole purpose the verification sensu stricto of the food safety status of food products in question. There are many examples, some of which have been covered in several articles of this blog, which illustrate the huge financial shortfall for our African countries as a result of the application of standards imposed on the export of our Goods for obvious considerations of trade restriction very remote from food safety itself. The difficulty is not, however, in the diagnosis, but in the search for the possible solution to initiate a path, which will inevitably be slow and difficult, in order to reduce some of the inequality in trade between Africa and the rest of the world, and with the EU in the first place.

Some people sometimes suggest that they address the Codex Alimentarius bodies without having a clear idea of ​​what exactly to ask of this body, or whether the Forum has any prerogative to resolve the imbalance Trade in Africa. For at the end of the ends, in a somewhat schematic way, the Codex is above all the guardianship on a collection of texts which have been adopted by consensus, frequently in the absence of the countries concerned but which are now in force. Without forgetting that by playing a little, with a little degree of bad faith, on the famous “Precautionary Principle” and the no less famous clause that each country has the right to take measures to preserve the health of its Citizens, and other technical and procedural aspects of the Codex texts, there are loopholes in the shape of a boulevard for any country wishing to use such tools to its advantage to refuse products that it does not want on its market for one reason or another.

As can be inferred, our African countries are not in a position to rebalance our deficit balances with our northern neighbors by taking the regulatory paths they have set up themselves and Want to put at our disposal. A frontal clash on the inflation of standards would also not be indicated because in the most optimistic scenario, this would eventually lead to a victory of Pyrrhus without any interest for our countries which are sorely lacking in resources.

In college, we learned that understanding a problem is 50% of the solution. So, what are our problems in Africa in the agri-food sector? We sell our agricultural raw materials at ridiculous prices and we buy the corresponding finished products at prohibitive prices. In this respect the problem is much less serious than if we had no raw materials. Moreover, everyone is aware that the know-how exists in our countries or it is easily accessible. Funding follows previous considerations. For what is lacking, King Mohammed VI has clearly pointed out during his speech of 31 January 2017 before the 28th African Union Summit in Addis Ababa that Africa must now trust its own Rather than borrowing external expertise which is increasingly inadequate to help advance development in Africa.

For all of the above and other more intimate considerations, the time has come to launch a Continental Certification Label for Africa, based on rigorous scientific and technical criteria and financially affordable by SMEs and local cooperatives so to honor the operators of our continent who are working in line with the Codex Alimentarius Code of Food Safety rules in the food chain. And to boost inter-African trade in the agri-food sector, which is the first goal to be achieved in the near future.

Expertise/News

The mediocre praises the mediocre

Posted on by Ahmed ESSADKI

A few days ago a woman and her daughter died from botulinum toxin poisoning. ONSSA (National Office for the Safety of Food Products) has issued two press releases, see here and here, praising, against common sense, the work of the company to the product complained of without naming it! The press reported the name of KOUTOUBIA, leader of the deli meats based on “Mechanically separated meat” (VSM) in Morocco, as the manufacturer of the product in question.

It is interesting to note that, contrary to habit, the above-mentioned ONSSA press releases were written this time in Arabic only. It is likely that if there was a French translation, the chances would have been great those African readers would be informed and that this idea does not correspond to the good image that Morocco would like to give on the Green Morocco Plan to the continent. Would ONSSA have yielded to political pressure to disrupt its usually bilingual press releases? What is certain is that the guardianship body has been set up to ensure the safety of food consumed by humans and animals. Praising a company whose product caused the deaths of consumers is simply mind-boggling. Personally, I am used to the low-end work of this organization (see different articles on this blog). Indeed, for nearly 25 years now that I work as expert witness, comprising hundreds of legal assessments for various courts of the Kingdom; I can say that many responsible of Repression of fraud, of which I had the opportunity to observe the actions, some of which are perhaps now draped from the cover ONSSA, are simply not up to the demands of this type of mission. The question that arises is why these services in particular, unlike other government departments, have not benefited from an upgrade? It is difficult to answer this question given the sensitivity and scope of food control. But Morocco is usually quick to implement upgrading operations if it receives criticism from European bodies on a particular service or organization. It is true that the Europeans (some in any case) directly and indirectly rent the services of those responsible for ONSSA whereas we as Moroccans observe that the performances of ONSSA are below mediocrity. This leads to the following question: Why the heck, Europeans are so complacent with ONSSA and its affiliates. There is no evidence and there is a risk of smear. Now, if we consider another point of view, we realize that without certification from our neighbors in the North, we cannot export to the European market, by far the leading market for Moroccan and African agri-food products in general. Reading in the other direction, this indicates that the credibility of the ONSSA “accreditation” is at zero level for the clients on the other side of the Mediterranean shore. The loop is closed: what weakens the credibility of ONSSA, favors that of other European private actors who in many cases take advantage of it to rip off our local operators. There are many examples that support this reality.

According to information from direct sources, some cooperatives experience big difficulties with a European certifier who has managed to impose itself by a ministerial decree (a calamity!) and got a monopoly on certification under the Field of the “BIO” in Morocco. Regularly, the food products of these cooperatives, certified by that body, are blocked at the entrance to certain European markets, pending the production of the health certificates relating to the products in question. And each time, the certifier concerned takes weeks or even months to issue this type of regulatory document. It should be borne in mind that the “BIO” or “Terroir” certification or other qualifier of this kind does not prejudice the sanitary quality of the product which is regulated by Law 28-07, which provides for penalties In the event of breach of the law. Now these “certifiers” are in Morocco and Africa to make money without any risk, as is the case for certifications called “BIO”. Precisely, another of these European certifiers had contacted me some time ago to ask me  if I wanted, on the basis of the analytical data that he would send me, to write an Analysis Bulletin (BA) and sign it against payment. I refused, of course, because this practice is unprofessional or even fraudulent in the eyes of the regulations in force. But these people eventually find a professional “good apple” to perform the job as they ask. This gives them judicial cover and allows them, in the case of the blocked cooperatives mentioned above, to issue a BA to foreign customs in peace.

It seems that the Moroccan government has not yet decided to make the upgrading of ONSSA structures a priority. Perhaps these poisonings with successive deaths of innocent consumers will persuade him to give a cleanup of the modus operandi followed until now by this “Authority”.