Regulation (EU) 2018/775-in introducing the requirement to disclose the different origin or provenance of theprimary ingredient on the label-includes a number of exceptions. In favor of, among others, registered trademarks, PGIs and TSGs, etc.
However, these exemptions do not a priori exclude the application of said regulation. Indeed, one must check, on a case-by-case basis, the news offered in labels and advertisements. And the ways in which they are presented. Analysis on the issue of PGI products, to follow. Operation Transparency.
Reg. EU 2018/775, the exemptions provided for
Reg. EU 2018/775, ‘laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 (…) on the provision of food information to consumers, as regards the rules on the indication of the country of origin or place of provenance of the primary ingredient of a food’ provided a number of exemptions (Article 1.2). In favor of the geographical references contained in the commercial information of the following products.
A) ‘customary and generic names containing geographical terms that literally indicate origin, but whose common interpretation is not an indication of the origin or place of origin of the food’ (e.g., ‘pesto alla genovese. Considering 8)
(B) ‘indications of the country of origin or place of provenance of a food that are part of the protected product names as geographical indications under’:
– reg. EC 110/2008 (liquors and spirits,)
– reg. UE 1151/2012 (DOP, IGP, STG),
– reg. EU 1308/2013 (so-called Single CMO, Common Market Organization),
– reg. EU 251/2014 (aromatized wines. See Recital 6)
C) geographical indications ‘protected under international agreements’. Such as the already concluded CETA and JEFTA, EU-Singapore, EU-Mercosur treaties. As well as others, either under negotiation (e.g., TTIP, EU-Indonesia, EU-Mexico, EU-New Zealand, etc.) or being finalized(EU-Vietnam, EU-China, Recital 6)
D) ‘indications of the country of origin or place of provenance of a food that are part of registered trademarks‘ (Recital 7),
E) ‘identification marks accompanying a food in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 853/2004’ (to be applied on all animal products other than fresh meat, which are instead subject to health stamps. Recital 9).
The European Commission reserved the right to ‘further examine how, for the above-mentioned names’ under B, C, D ‘the origin of the primary ingredient should be indicated.’ A little more than 2 years have passed in the meantime, but there are no reports of ongoing work in this regard. Nor is there any record of any pressure to do so from self-styled champions of Made in Italy and origin labeling. (1)
Primary ingredient origin, the narrow boundaries of exemptions
The above exemptions, it should be noted, do not entail the disapplication tout court of Regulation (EU) 2018/775. Their meaning is simply to clarify that geographical indications or suggestions contained within the names or logos alone do not trigger the obligation to indicate the different origin or provenance of the primary ingredient.
Any other reference to or evocation of the production territory–outside the narrow boundaries indicated–constitutes a prerequisite for the application of the regulation. (2) Beginning with the indication of the location of the establishment (of production or packaging), as noted above, as information affixed on a voluntary basis, as well as being additional to the information-instead mandatory-about the name (or company name) and address of theresponsible operator.
Primary ingredient origin, when the obligation is triggered
The ‘Communication of the Commission on the application of the provisions of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011‘ In this regard, it emphasizes how-in the analysis of food labels and advertisements-one must first check compliance with the criteria underlying the Food Information Regulation (3,4). Namely, fairness of information practices (EU Reg. 1169/11, Articles 7 and 36).
‘Food information. do not mislead, particularly (…) as to the characteristics of the food and, in particular, the nature, identity, properties, composition, quantity, shelf life, country of origin or place of provenance, method of manufacture or production’ (EU reg. 1169/11, Article 7.1.a).
The issue of PGI products
On PGI products. The European Commission thus specifies that ”In cases where a food also bears other visual indications, including those referring to the same or different geographic locations, such indications are within the scope of application‘ of Regulation (EU) 2018/775, if the other conditions (discrepancy between product origin and primary ingredient origin or provenance) are met. (5)
All it takes is a word or graphic element boasting of Made in Italy (e.g., flags and maps, symbols, monuments, landscapes, names and figures associated with territories) to trigger, for example, the requirement to indicate next to each sign that the meat used in PGI cured meats often comes from abroad. (6)
PGI cured meats, transparency operation
Operation Transparency should spur industry to favor domestic raw material, as consumers demand and common sense suggests. We need to put an end to the disgrace of importing 56 million pork legs a year, more than 1 million a week, and then boasting the false Italian-ness of a range of products. (7)
Cooked hams primarily, but also a number of PGIs. From Coppa di Parma to Cotechino di Modena, Colonnata lard, Bologna and Prato mortadella. And then porchetta from Ariccia with Krukko pork, prosciutto from Amatrice like those from Norcia and Sauris. Ferrarese salama da sugo such as Cremona salami, Felino, Piedmont. Also, speck Alto Adige and zampone from Modena.
Transparency is only the first step, which is essential for consumAtors to make responsible purchasing choices. Geographical Indications Protected by the Secret no longer exist, and those who persist in using foreign meats to save costs will lose sales as well as reputation. The integrity of the supply chains on the territories is the only solution, as even the stones will understand sooner or later.
Dario Dongo
Notes
(1) On the other hand, the writer’s call – to complain to the Court of Justice about the European Commission’s excessive power in introducing exceptions not provided for in Reg. EU 1169/11 – did not get any feedback from agricultural confederations, nor consumer associations in Italy. V. https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/consum-attori/origine-ingrediente-primario-reg-ue-2018-775-call-for-action
(2) Trademarks in turn, as noted above, can trigger the obligation to indicate the country of origin of the product (Made in) and consequently, where applicable, the different origin or provenance of the primary ingredient. V. https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/etichette/marchi-origine-prodotto-e-ingrediente-primario
(3) Commission Notice on the application of the provisions of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011. (C/2020/428). In Official Journal C 32, 31.1.20, %3A52020XC0131%
(4) Dario Dongo. Primary ingredient origin, reg. EU 2018/775. European Commission Guidelines. 18.1.20,
https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/etichette/origine-ingrediente-primario-reg-ue-2018-775-linee-guida-commissione-europea
(5) See document in note 3, section 2.4.6
(6) Pork origin on label, see https://www.foodagriculturerequirements.com/origine-carne-suina-in-etichetta-di-prosciutto-e-salumi-risponde-lavvocato-dario-dongo
(7) Assosuini data, year 2019. On the fake ‘national ham,’ see https://www.foodagriculturerequirements.com/archivio-notizie/domande-e-risposte/prosciutto-nazionale-risponde-l-avvocato-dario-dongo
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
