Seafood exporters in India feel that the EU, which was once touted the most lucrative export destination for Indian seafood exports, is slowly losing its sheen because of its stringent quality control norms coupled with the overall risk factors associated with exporting seafood to the EU.

 

Limited ability to appeal against EU health authorities and rejections of seafood consignments have made the EU a high-risk destination for Indian exporters.

 

The Seafood Exporters Association of India (SEAI) said irrational and binding decisions of the EU health authorities at Brussels and veterinary inspectors at destination ports lead to higher expenses and loss for exporters.

 

In a meeting attended by officials of the Marine Exports Product Development Authority (MPEDA), Exports Inspection Council and SEAI, exporters alleged that jurisdiction of EU veterinary inspectors are often limitless and not confined to a book of procedures.

 

The EU has recently tightened entry into the zone through various measures, which include catch certificate and mandatory testing of 20% of all aquaculture products.

 

In the recent past, the EU has displaced the US as the single largest market for Indian seafood. In 2009-10, the EU had a share of 30.07% in dollar realisation. Anti-dumping duty on Indian shrimps by the US saw exporters focusing on the EU countries to increase exports and de-risk trade. "But through new regulations, the EU is also putting non-tariff barriers on Indian exports," an exporter said.

 

SEAI said that financial institutions are discouraging trade with the EU because of stringent penalties and uncertainties.

 

In the EU, unlike the US markets, rejection of consignment due to higher than permissible residue of antibiotic or other toxins by EU veterinary inspectors is final and there is no scope for appeal. "In the case of the US, exporter can send the sample to an independent laboratory and dispute the findings and go in for an appeal," SEAI added.

 

The EU also makes it mandatory to destroy the cargo, which the US does not.

 

Exporters alleged that appeals in most of the cases are time consuming and costly affairs. They are also miffed at the fact that containers are sometimes held up in EU ports for several months, resulting in loss to the shipper as demurrage.

 

One exporter said that the EU countries change the maximum permissible residue level frequently and Indian inspection agencies are forced to change the standards accordingly, which makes compliance very troublesome.

 

Anwar Hashim, national president of SEAI, said that the issues are grave and need to be addressed at the highest level. There are nearly 500 entry points into the EU and procedures are not harmonised and unified, he said. "The EU is an important market and we need to understand their compulsions. We hope that some issues could be sorted out mutually through discussions."