Case challenging the European Supplement Directive's restrictive provisions

April 6, 2005

5 April 2005 - In a case brought by the Alliance for Natural Health

(ANH)) and others in the UK, challenging the European Supplement

Directive's restrictive provisions, especially the limitation of

allowed ingredients to a short list of mostly synthetic sources of

vitamins and minerals, Advocate General Leendert Geelhoed has filed

his opinion, coming to the following conclusion:

" Examination of the provisions of Directive 2002/46/EC of the

European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the

laws of the Member States relating to food supplements has disclosed

that the Directive infringes the principle of proportionality, because

basic principles of Community law, such as the requirements of legal

protection, of legal certainty and of sound administration have not

been properly taken into account. The Directive is, therefore, invalid.â€

While this is not the final decision of the court which is expected

only in June, the opinion of the Advocate General gives hope that the

directive may eventually be re-drafted to allow products currently on

the market to remain on sale. Currently, the EU measure mandates that

products not in compliance with the restrictive " short list " of

ingredients would become illegal in August this year. This new

development is a great relief for all concerned - a ray of light at

the end of the tunnel so to say. ANH has a press release which you can

find in the second part of this article. There are also press reports,

early examples are (here) and (here). The Advocate General examines

the case and all connected laws and makes a recommendation to the

court. In his opinion, Geelhoed confirms that the supplements

directive has legitimate aims of both health protection and promoting

trade in the Community, but he also harshly criticizes the

administrative procedure for adding substances to the list of allowed

ingredients saying it lacks transparency and even minimal standards of

good administrative practice. His recommendation therefore translates

to " back to the drawing board " - at least as far as procedures go. If

you are interested in the actual text of the Advocate General's

opinion, you can find it here.Download PDF file (4/5/2005 4:11:02 PM)

Recommended Posts