(1)

The Interim Agreement establishing a framework for an Economic Partnership Agreement between the Eastern and Southern Africa States, on the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, on the other part (1) (‘the interim EPA’) applies provisionally as from 14 May 2012 between the Union and the Republic of Madagascar, the Republic of Mauritius, the Republic of Seychelles and the Republic of Zimbabwe.

(2)

Protocol 1 to the interim EPA concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’ and methods of administrative cooperation contains the rules of origin for the importation of products originating in the ESA States into the Union.

(3)

In accordance with Article 42(1) of Protocol 1 to the interim EPA, derogations from those rules of origin are granted where the development of existing industries in the ESA States justifies them.

(4)

In accordance with Article 42(5), when a request for derogation concerns an island state, its examination shall be carried out with a favourable bias having particular regard to the economic and social impact of the decision to be taken especially in respect of employment and the need to apply the derogation for a period taking into account the particular situation of the island state and its difficulties.

(5)

On 29 November the ESA-EU Customs Cooperation Committee granted, in accordance with Article 42(8) of Protocol 1 to the interim EPA, an automatic derogation (2) to the beneficiary ESA States (Mauritius, Seychelles and Madagascar) for 8 000 tonnes of preserved tuna and 2 000 tonnes of tuna loins.

(6)

In addition to the automatic derogation referred to before, Mauritius has requested a derogation covering a quantity of 6 000 tonnes of preserved tuna of CN codes 1604 14 11, 1604 14 18 and 1604 20 70 manufactured from tuna of the species Katsuwonus pelamis (skipjack), Thunnus alalunga (albacore tuna), Thunnus albacares (yellow fin tuna) and Thunnus obesus (big eye tuna) imported into the Union from 1 April 2013 to 31 December 2013 in accordance with Article 42(1) of Protocol 1 to the interim EPA.

(7)

Mauritian tuna processors heavily rely on the supply by EU purse seiners of originating tuna under the interim EPA. Recent catches of originating skipjack (Katsuwonus pelamis) in the Indian Ocean have decreased causing new challenges for Mauritian processors confronted with an increasing demand for skipjack-based products in the Union. Granting a derogation for yellow fin tuna-based products (Thunnus albacares) is not justified as catches of originating yellow fin tuna in the Indian Ocean have increased. Derogation should therefore be granted for skipjack only.

(8)

Exports of canned tuna from Mauritius to the Union have been constantly increasing over the last five years.

(9)

Mauritius benefits from the global quota provided for by the automatic derogation granted to all beneficiary ESA states (Mauritius, Seychelles and Madagascar). In case of partial use of the quota by the other beneficiary ESA states, Mauritius could also benefit from possible annual re-allocations of unused quantities by these states. Given the recent provisional application of the interim EPA, an appropriate monitoring of the utilization rate of the automatic derogation has not yet been possible in order to verify the re-allocation patterns of unused quantities among the beneficiary ESA states.

(10)

Mauritius may source originating raw tuna from outside the Indian Ocean in accordance with Articles 4 and 5 of Protocol 1 to the interim EPA.

(11)

The on-going EPA negotiations between the European Union and other ACP states from which Mauritius may source originating raw tuna for its processing industry may offer alternative supply opportunities of originating tuna in the near future.

(12)

It is therefore appropriate to provide Mauritius with a derogation for 2 000 tonnes of preserved skipjack which respects the ability of the existing industry to continue its exports to the Union.

(13)

The potential re-allocation of unused quantities between the beneficiary ESA states and the cumulation provided for in the interim EPA justify that the derogation is granted temporarily. To provide for legal certainty for operators, the derogation should be granted for a period of 1 year with effect from 1 April 2013.

(14)

In order to benefit from the derogation, the non-originating materials to be used for the manufacture of preserved skipjack of CN codes 1604 14 11, 1604 14 18 and 1604 20 70 should be frozen skipjack (Katsuwonus pelamis) of HS Heading 0303.

(15)

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (3) lays down rules relating to the management of tariff quotas. In order to ensure efficient management carried out in close cooperation between the authorities of the ESA States, the customs authorities of the Union and the Commission, those rules should apply mutatis mutandis to the quantities imported under the derogation granted by this Decision.

(16)

In order to allow efficient monitoring of the operation of the derogation, the authorities of the ESA States should communicate regularly to the Commission details of the EUR.1 movement certificates issued.