|
AfCFTA-000-131 |
|
2025-06-26 |
Djibouti: Port of Djibouti |
Ethiopia |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
A procedural inconsistency exists in the handling of export shipments from Ethiopia to the Djibouti Free Zone, whereby the acceptance of tarpaulin-covered trucks is applied inconsistently in comparison to containerized cargo. In practice, some shipments transported in tarpaulin-covered trucks are permitted entry into the Free Zone, while others are denied access and required to be containerized without clear justification or prior notice. This inconsistent enforcement creates uncertainty among traders and transport operators, leading to delays, additional handling and transportation costs, and operational inefficiencies.
As a result, exporters particularly small-scale traders face difficulties in planning their logistics and complying with requirements, which ultimately reduces their competitiveness and limits smooth market access along the corridor. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-130 |
1.3. Other |
2025-09-23 |
Ethiopia: Ethio-Dibouti Railway |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Ethio-Djibouti Railway, in addition to providing transport services to the Dewele border, also offers freight forwarding services to exporters, either directly or through its agents. While the contractual agreement is established between the exporter and the railway operator, the actual service delivery is often carried out by third-party agents with whom exporters have no direct contact.
This arrangement limits the exporters ability to track consignments in real time. In several instances, exporters only become aware about the missing consignment at the border. So,the remaining/missing goods will be shipped separately through the same process, resulting in additional transport costs and delays. Consequently, there is a delay in meeting delivery deadlines, which affects the trader’s reliability and lead to financial losses as well.
|
|
|
AfCFTA-000-129 |
1.3. Other |
2025-11-18 |
Ethiopia: Government Institutions at One Stop Border Post |
Kenya |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
There is a lack of coordination arising from the fragmented structure of the offices and the limited number of officers assigned to support operations. Offices are located in different buildings that are not interrelated, and staffing constraints further reduce efficiency. For example, only one officer is responsible for conducting standard inspections for both export and import goods, creating a bottleneck.
In addition, each institution operates independently under its own supervision, with limited cross-agency integration. While some services, such as agriculture-related offices, still rely on manual processes, others, such as customs, have fully adopted digital systems for clearing goods. However, customs procedures still depend on confirmations from these other agencies before goods can be cleared, leading to delays and inefficiencies.
Overall, these structural and operational challenges contribute significantly to the lack of coordination. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-126 |
4.3. Other |
2026-01-07 |
Kenya: Moyale |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Ethiopian maize quality standards are not accepted in Kenya, requiring additional conformity assessment. This has resulted for an extra costs of approximately 44,000 Kenyan Shillings per consignment, increasing the cost of doing business. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-125 |
3.2. Conformity assessments |
2025-12-10 |
Ethiopia: Moyale |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
There were delays in obtaining approval or certification for goods imported through the Moyale border. Samples are required to be tested in Addis Ababa before clearance can take place. As a result, importers are expected to obtain the necessary approval before the goods are shipped to Ethiopia. Otherwise, if the approval is sought after the goods arrive and undergo document verification, significant delays may occur.
Following the complaint received, a visit was conducted to the Moyale One-Stop Border Post (OSBP), where these issues were confirmed. For instance, a Vaseline product with all the required specifications (five types) intended for import into Ethiopia was required to obtain prior approval. However, the process took up to two months. This approval or certification is essential for clearance.
If importers fail to secure the approval before the goods arrive at the border, they may face extended waiting periods to obtain the necessary authorization before clearance can proceed. This situation was observed at the Moyale OSBP and confirmed by officers responsible for document verification. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-124 |
3.2. Conformity assessments |
2026-01-08 |
Ethiopia: Dewele |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Imported tyres are subject to duplicated conformity assessment at destination, despite having undergone identical testing procedures in the country of origin. The absence of recognition of prior test results leads to unnecessary duplication and additional testing cost. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-122 |
2.6. Customs formalities |
2026-02-02 |
Djibouti: Port of Djibouti |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The importer experienced significant challenges during the customs clearance process at the Port of Djibouti. Upon arrival of the shipments (both containerized cargo and vehicles), they were informed of multiple documentation-request by customs authorities. These issues included minor discrepancies such as spelling errors in the Bill of Lading, as well as requirements to provide additional supporting documents that had not been communicated to them prior to the arrival of the cargo.
Importantly, these documentation requirement were not raised in advance, which prevented them from making the necessary corrections before the shipment has reached to the port. As a result, they were required to repeatedly amend and resubmit documents under a time pressure leading to delays in the clearance process.
Due to these combined challenges, the cargo remained at the port beyond the allowed free storage period. Consequently, the importers has incurred significant unplanned costs, including demurrage charges and other related port fees.
|
|
|
AfCFTA-000-119 |
2.6. Customs formalities |
2026-01-14 |
Ethiopia: Dilla Customs Office |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The Dilla Customs office has blocked for more than time to clear exported goods heading to the Moyale Border eventhough the required documents and fomalities has been fullfilled. The products were given a permit with a specific duration. This has been occuring several times at the same government institution. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-118 |
6.5. Other |
2026-03-17 |
Zimbabwe: Victoria Falls |
Zambia |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Informal traders carrying small quantities of goods, such as fresh produce, cooking oil, rice, sugar and pasta.
These traders cross the Victoria Falls border post by bike or foot.
The complaint concerns over 50 traders per day, crossing the border.
When entering Zimbabwe, they get stopped by Customs and will face seemingly arbitrary restrictions on quantities of goods that can enters (which change on a daily basis and depending on the specific officer on duty). When these arbitrary quantities are exceeded, the officers often confiscate all of the goods or demand bribes to release the traders. They also face threats when questioning the behaviour of the officer.
When returning after selling goods on the market in Zimbabwe, and after clearing the Zimbabwe Customs, they will often get stopped by police or soldiers in the no-mans-land between the borders to be demanded further bribes from the proceeds of their sales.
If bringing merchandise from Zimbabwe back to Zambia, depending on the officers at the border and despite the small quantities carried, they will be asked to obtain an export license from Harare. Or to pay another bribe to be released. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-117 |
poor road infrastructure |
2026-03-06 |
Djibouti: Galafi |
Ethiopia |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
The movement of goods through the Galafi border corridor is significantly constrained by poor road infrastructure between Ethiopian border and Djibouti, particularly around the Dikil town corridor, which stretches approximately 80 kilometers. Traders and transporters said that traveling within this route can take up to 19 hours for a relatively short distance compared to the same distance takes 4 hours in normal road infrastructure, mainly due to the poor condition of the road.
The prolonged travel time has several direct and indirect impacts on traders. First, delays in transportation often result in late arrival at the border post, which in turn leads to additional costs such as extended storage/container fees, and missed clearance schedules. These delays also significantly affect perishable goods, including agricultural products and livestock trade. Traders indicated that animals transported along this route sometimes suffer from stress, illness, or death due to the long and difficult journey, resulting in financial losses.
Another major concern is the health and safety of drivers. Spending nearly a full day to cover only 80 km exposes drivers to extreme fatigue, poor working conditions, and limited access to medical or emergency services along the route. The difficult road conditions also increase the likelihood of vehicle accidents and mechanical failures.
In cases of vehicle breakdown or accidents, transporters face additional burdens such as expensive car towing services, which further increase operational costs. Moreover, traders highlighted that insurance coverage for goods in transit is either unavailable or extremely expensive for this route. Because of the high risk associated with the road condition, many transporters are unable to afford insurance, leaving them financially vulnerable in the event of accidents, cargo or container damage, or loss.
Traders also emphasized that these challenges persist despite the existence of an alternative road that has already been constructed but is not yet operational. If this alternative route were opened and fully functional, it could significantly reduce travel time, lower transport costs, improve driver safety, and minimize losses related to perishable goods and livestock.
Overall, the poor infrastructure along the Galafi–Dikil corridor represents a substantial non-tariff barrier to trade, creating delays, increasing costs, and exposing traders and transporters to significant financial and safety risks. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-114 |
6.2. Surcharges, port taxes, statistical taxes, etc. |
2025-09-13 |
Tanzania, United Republic of: |
Uganda |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Currently, Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) Tariffs (2023) and the Tanzania Shipping Agencies Act Cap 145 (2026) do not address recent developments in regional transport, particularly the introduction and operation of Roll-on Roll-off (RoRo) vessels within the East Africa lake transport corridor.
In particular, at Mwanza Port, port charges levied on RoRo cargo by TPA are considerably high, and in most instances, include stevedoring and cargo handling fees that are not actually incurred. Given that RoRo cargo is driven on and off vessels without manual handling, the application of such charges is inconsistent with the nature of service provided. Additionally, wharfage fees are assessed at high levels compared to other regional ports, that further increase the overall cost burden on customers.
Despite efforts to engage port officials in constructive dialogue and propose a case-by-case assessment framework that would more accurately align charges with the actual services rendered, there has been limited willingness to review and adjust the existing approach. Charges continue to be applied under the prevailing tariff structure without adequate consideration of the unique operational characteristics of RoRo transport.
The cumulative effect of these high and misaligned port charges is that prospective customers are discouraged from utilizing lake transport services. This is particularly concerning given that water transport offers a shorter, more cost-effective alternative to the long and less efficient road route via the Mutukula border between Uganda and Tanzania.
Furthermore, lake transport provides broader economic and environmental benefits. It is a more environmentally sustainable mode of transport, contributing to reduced carbon emissions, lower fuel consumption per-kilometer, and decreased road congestion. Increased utilization of water transport relieves pressure off regional road infrastructure, thereby reducing road maintenance costs and promotes the use of available multimodal transport corridors.
In light of the foregoing, there is a clear need for a review and modernization of the existing lake tariff framework to incorporate RoRo-specific provisions. Such reforms would promote fair pricing, encourage modal shift to more sustainable transport options, and the broader objectives of regional trade facilitation and infrastructure optimization`.
|
|
|
AfCFTA-000-106 |
2.5. Rules of origin |
2025-11-26 |
Egypt: Port of Ain Sukhna |
South Africa |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
We are trying to sell white-top kraftlinerboard (HS code 4804.19) manufactured by Mondi in South Africa to customers in Egypt. However, Egyptian Customs are insisting on applying a 15% import duty because of the country of origin, despite the AfCFTA.
To our understanding, this product should qualify for a 0% duty rate under AfCFTA preferences, but Customs’ current assessment is not reflecting this. We would appreciate clarification on the correct applicable duty and guidance on how to ensure the AfCFTA exemption is applied at clearance. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-105 |
2.1. Customs valuation |
2025-07-23 |
Côte d'Ivoire: |
Ghana |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
In July 2025, B5 Plus Limited Export to Cote D'Ivoire under the ETLS was met with an arbitrary and excessive uplift in dutiable value of exports ranging from 2.4 times and 3.11times our actual transaction value in spite of having valid ECOWAS Certification of Origin. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-101 |
7.2. Other |
2025-09-09 |
Algeria: Salon IATF, Alger |
Comoros |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
J'étais présente au salon IATF, venant des Comores pour exposer des produits alimentaires. Malheureusement, je n'ai pas pu vendre mes produits en euros ou dollars, j'ai du les vendre en dinar algérien. J'ai rencontré des difficultés pour changer cet argent en euros ou dollars car plusieurs reglementations m'en n'ont empéché. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-100 |
7.2. Other |
2025-09-09 |
Algeria: Salon IATF, Alger |
Comoros |
New |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Je suis une MPME exposante à la foire IATF 2025 à Alger, à mon arrivée je ne connaissais pas le système monétaire local. J'ai vendu des produits agroalimentaires (vanille) et cosmétiques à un taux de change de 150 dinars pour un euro (taux de la banque). Après ces transactions, j'ai voulu échanger ces dinars en euros et c'est la que j'ai appris ce que ce n'était pas possible et que sinon il fallait les échanger à un taux de 260 (un écart de 110 dinars par euro) de manière informelle. Je me suis donc déplacé à la banque et à ma grande surprise je ne pouvais pas avoir des euros. J'ai également demandé à transférer l'argent aux Comores mais aucune agence ne pouvait le faire. Ma seule issue était de tout dépenser en Algerie. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-092 |
2.6. Customs formalities |
2024-09-03 |
Côte d'Ivoire: Noe |
Ghana |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Ladyshes Code Ventures is a registered company in Ghana that import and export agro-based products.
The company received orders to supply cocoa shells to be used as fertilizer in Ghana. Because there was limited supply in Ghana, the company decided to take advantage of the Africa Continental Free Trade Area (AFCFTA) to import from Cote D'Ivoire.
Accordingly, the company visited AFCFTA secretariate to enquire further about the possibility to import the Cocoa Shells from Abidjan/Cote D' Ivoire to Ghana. The secretariat advised that we obtain the AFCFTA Certificate of Origin or ECOWAS Trade Liberalization (ETLS) and that we should visit the Ministry of Industry and Commerce in Abidjan to attain it of which we did.
The Cocoa Shells was bought and unfortunately for us when the truck got to the Noe border, customs requested an authorization from us before the truck (LSR-379YD) would be allowed to cross the border.
Quickly the agent wrote to the Cote D'Ivoire Cocoa and Coffee Board for the authorization on two (2) different occasions but to no avail.
On one faithful day, customs officials asked the driver to take the truck through the scan of which he did.
Afterwards a report issued and confirmed that it was cocoa shells but they still need an authorization to cross the border.
Notwithstanding the above, the driver was arrested, detained, put in cells and now facing trial for not having authorization letter.
Currently, the truck has been there for almost two months, the shells is at its perishable stage, the authorization has still not been issued, and the driver is facing trial.
|
|
|
AfCFTA-000-088 |
3.1. Technical regulations, and standards including packaging, labelling and marking requirements |
2024-08-01 |
Tanzania, United Republic of: Tunduma |
South Africa |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Certain African countries are now requiring annual renewal of all test reports for our safety footwear crossing their borders. Financially, this translates to approximately R55,000 per test per style. For manufacturers such as ourselves exporting multiple styles annually, the cost could potentially run into millions, significantly impacting our margins but also creating potential delays or disruptions. |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-087 |
2.4. Samples |
2024-11-20 |
Lesotho: Maseru Bridge |
Lesotho |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Samples being sent by road-freight to South Africa for testing at an accredited laboratory were refused passage.
Company was informed that the only way to send the samples for testing was to send via air |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-085 |
4.3. Other |
2024-09-24 |
Tanzania, United Republic of: Kabanga |
Burundi |
Transferred |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
URT IS IMPOSING TO BURUNDI A TAX FOR SALUBRITY FOR TRANSIT TRUCKS . |
|
|
AfCFTA-000-066 |
3.2. Conformity assessments |
2023-09-19 |
Nigeria: Port of Onne |
Tanzania, United Republic of |
In process |
View |
|
Complaint:
|
Nigeria has made it mandatory for COTECNA( Private Company) to inspect the sisal fiber that is exported to Nigeria, the same role is performed by the Tanzania Sisal Board which is the regulator of sisal in Tanzania, hence multiple inspections, and Nigeria do not recognize certificate from Tanzania Sisal Board. COTECNA charges an annual registration fee start with USD 1000 and adding up USD 120 per additional product and the fee for a certificate of conformity is USD 350 per consignment. which the Sisal Board does not charge for certificate of conformity |
|
|
Progress:
|
AfCFTA Secretariat in contact with State Parties National Focal points to resolve the NTB |
|
