The COMESA Court of Justice has faulted a 2018 decision by the government of Mauritius that imposed a 10% customs duty on imported edible oils without informing other member states, in a landmark ruling about procedures within the bloc.
- •According to the ruling, Mauritius’ decision should have been communicated to other member states, not just the Secretary General of the trading bloc; a breach in procedure that prompted the court to terminate the order.
- •Mauritius invoked Article 61 of the COMESA Treaty on safeguard measures to stamp the duty as a strategy to control the flow of imports and protect its local edible oils industry.
- •A Mauritian edible oil importer – Agiliss Ltd. – filed a complaint with the regional court, challenging the legality of the order and seeking to prevent the country from imposing any non-tariff barriers.
“It follows that the steps taken in non-compliance with the Treaty and the Regulations must likewise be struck down as a nullity. It is unimportant that the measure was never implemented,” the court ruled. Agiliss Ltd. imports basic commodities such as pre-packaged edible oils, from Egypt – which is also a COMESA Member State.
The court also determined that the government of Mauritius did not carry out proper investigations as required by COMESA regulations and did not engage stakeholders in the sector before applying the safeguard measure.
On its part, the Mauritian government argued that the measure was never applied and it did not make sense to declare that the government had breached any treaty. The court stated that the case involved the procedures taken and not the measure itself.
However, the ruling did not agree with the applicant in its prayers to seek a permanent injunction against customs duty on edible oils by the Mauritian government. It stated that every country in the bloc has a sovereign right to impose duties based on arising circumstances, only if the right procedures are followed.
