cosmetics, animals, animal testing, vivisection
The European Court of Justice confirms the stop to cosmetics tested on animals.
La judgment of the EU Court reiterates the importance of the prohibition of cosmetic testing on animals established by the EU Directive in force since 11 March 2013, despite the ambiguities contained therein, including the possibility of carrying out tests on animals for products destined for the markets of countries that still consider them indispensable.
Read also: COSMETIC TESTS ON ANIMALS: FROM TODAY STOP ALL OVER EUROPE
This possibility is supported by theEfci (European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients), a European trade association of manufacturers of cosmetic ingredients, which has requested authorization to market in the United Kingdom products made for China and Japan, and therefore tested on animals.
This is a hypothesis on which the High Court of Justice of England and Wales has requested the ruling of the European Court of Justice, which reiterated the firm ban.
Read also: COSMETIC TESTS: PATENTED ALTERNATIVE METHOD WITHOUT ANIMAL TESTING
However, the battle is not yet completely won.
In fact, according to the LOW Many gaps still remain in the EU Directive which prohibits the testing and import of cosmetic materials tested on animals:
“In fact, companies cannot carry out tests throughout the EU, but they can do it abroad by selling these products in non-EU countries. Furthermore, many raw materials are not only used in the cosmetic field, but can overlap with the chemical and pharmaceutical ones, and consequently are tested on animals because required by other regulations ”- explained LAV.
For this the LAV reiterates the importance of international standard "Stop animal testing", the only recognized specification that provides for the control by an independent body of the entire production chain, including all raw materials, suppliers and production laboratories.
According to PETA it's about only a partial victory, so much so that in this way the European Court would weaken the ban on the sale of cosmetics tested on animals.
“Many animals will be spared from toxic and fatal tests following the decision by the European Court of Justice that only animal-free methods can be used to meet EU safety requirements. This is a significant but only partial victory, as the ruling also allows companies to sell products in the EU after having tested them on animals in China or other countries, as long as the tests are not used to prove the safety of the product. product "- said Dr. Julia Baines of PETA UK.
PETA asks consumers to use this list of brands that have promised never to test on animals anywhere in the world when they buy cosmetics and personal care products.
Read also: COSMETIC TESTS: A SYNTHETIC SKIN TO "SAVE THE SKIN" TO ANIMALS
In the opinion ofENPA however, with this ruling, the EU Court clarified beyond any reasonable doubt that cosmetics tested on animals are banned by the Union.
“The ruling with which the European Court of Justice reiterates that in Europe it is not possible to market cosmetic products with ingredients tested on animals has the great merit of clarifying, once and for all, that the European legislation on the subject does not lend itself to being stretched. The ban on testing cosmetic ingredients on animals is therefore a peremptory prohibition and cannot be circumvented on the pretext that such experiments are conducted because they are required by the market regulations of third countries. What is permissible in Beijing or Tokyo is not permissible in Brussels”- underlined the national president of ENPA, Carla Rocchi.
The problem arises above all with regard to theEngland, due to the Brexit.
“It is unfortunately possible that in the future it will return to London. Ironically, the case was raised precisely in the England of Brexit, which, as we denounced at the time, in the field of animal protection and protection risks making a dangerous turnaround ”- concluded the ENPA.
The hope is that any doubts in this regard are clarifiedor, given the fear that companies that do not test cosmetic ingredients in Europe, given that it is prohibited, may instead test them abroad, and still continue to sell their products in the EU.
If ingredient tests are still needed, why not choose alternative methods?
Read here the judgment of the EU Court on cosmetics.
Marta Albè
