Controversial application of Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006

Priority question for written answer P-002244/2024
to the Commission
Rule 144
Dario Nardella (S&D)

Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/468 - adopted on the basis of Article 8 of Regulation (EC) 1925/2006, which sets rules for the addition of vitamins, minerals and other substances to food - prohibits substances such as aloe-emodin. This ban applies not only to the intentional addition of its purified form, but also to its natural presence in plants such as aloe and rhubarb.

Four cases are currently pending before the Court of Justice, disputing the Commission's use of Article 8 to ban plants intended for food, instead of just banning substances added to food. Despite this, the Commission has initiated further procedures for plants widely used in food, such as sweet fennel fruits.

Furthermore, the heads of food safety agencies[1] also recommended evaluating 117 botanicals, with 13 as a priority.

• 1.Why is the Commission opening new procedures before the Court ruling, given that there are no urgent safety concerns with the botanicals in question?
• 2.Does the Commission find it appropriate to apply Article 8 to create a negative list of plants for food supplements?
• 3.Does the Commission believe a ban on these plants in food supplements should also extend to foods and spirits containing these substances, and is the Commission aware of the impact these decisions will have on the European food sector?

Submitted: 24.10.2024

• [1] https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/Internationales/Report_HoA_WG_FS-de.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=8