Lifetime ban on food crime offenders must be fully implemented with no blind spots
Compared with offline regulation, online food safety regulation is more difficult and requires a higher level of control capability. For example, a "lifetime ban on food crime offenders" requires both offline and online regulation working together.
The Implementation Regulations of the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China (Revised Draft for Review) was recently released for public comment. In response to the current development of the online meal-ordering industry, the draft for review strengthened online food safety regulation. It stipulates that if an online food producer or operator is placed under investigation or prosecuted on suspicion of a food safety crime, is sentenced to a criminal penalty by a people's court for a food safety crime, is detained by a public security organ or subjected to other public security administrative penalties for a food safety violation, or is subjected by food and drug regulatory authorities and other departments to penalties such as revocation of a license or an order to suspend production or business in accordance with the law, the third-party platform provider for online food transactions shall immediately stop providing online transaction platform services to that online food producer or operator.
Food safety is no small matter. To further safeguard the public's "safety at the tip of the tongue," the new Food Safety Law, which took effect on October 1, 2015, made many adjustments to keep pace with the times, such as increasing penalties for violators in the food sector. Article 135 stipulates that anyone sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment or a heavier penalty for a food safety crime shall be permanently prohibited from engaging in food production and operation management. A "lifetime ban on food crime offenders" not only declares an attitude of strict governance but also drives lawbreakers out of the market, which is equivalent to adding another fence for food safety.
On April 7 this year, Beijing issued the first "ban" penalty since the implementation of the new Food Safety Law - a food production enterprise in Tongzhou District was lawfully revoked of its food production license due to falsely labeling food labels, and the company's legal representative was banned from the industry for 5 years. It is said that this was the first case in China of "license revocation" and an occupational qualification penalty imposed on the person involved. Practices such as food labels being "born prematurely" and expired food having labels secretly altered are persistent "industry hidden rules." In the past, because the value of goods in such cases was not large and test results were often qualified, penalties were mostly administrative penalties such as warnings and fines, and the punishment was insufficient. A "ban" is equivalent to cutting off lawbreakers' source of income, so its severity is different.
The complexity of China's food safety situation is inseparable from the current state of the food industry being small, scattered, and disorderly - most are small enterprises, plus countless small workshops and street vendors. Given this particularity, it is not easy to weave a comprehensive market regulatory network and achieve seamless regulation with no blind spots. Take the "lifetime ban on food crime offenders" for example: for those with a criminal record for food safety crimes, evasion is not difficult - "fire one shot and move to another place" - and they can still engage in the food industry. In particular, in recent years, the meal-ordering business has shown explosive growth, and online meal ordering has become a fairly common way of life. Data shows that as of June this year, the number of online food delivery users nationwide had reached 150 million, an increase of 31.8% from the end of last year. The benefits of online meal ordering are self-evident, but its drawbacks should not be underestimated, with risks concentrated in food safety. CCTV once exposed "ghost restaurants" appearing on online meal-ordering platforms: the license names and addresses displayed by some restaurants belonged to others and had nothing to do with them at all. If it is unknown who is operating the restaurant, where does other regulation even begin? If management is inadequate, this will be a blind spot.
The Implementation Regulations of the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China (Revised Draft for Review), in response to the current development of the online meal-ordering industry, strengthened online food safety regulation and can be seen as a move to shore up weak links. Compared with offline regulation, online food safety regulation is more difficult and requires a higher level of control capability. For example, a "lifetime ban on food crime offenders" requires both offline and online regulation working together. For offline regulation, big data can be used to achieve information sharing among different regions and departments, ensuring that some food safety criminals who have been sentenced cannot, after completing their sentences, move to another place and resume their old trade; for online regulation, the main responsibility lies with third-party platforms for online food transactions, which have the responsibility to conduct real-name registration and review licenses for online food producers and operators. The question is, if a third-party platform fails to perform its duties, or even knowingly violates the rules, what responsibility should the platform bear? This probably needs further refinement.
Severe measures are needed to address disorder, and food safety can never be too strict. With laws and regulations leading the way and regulation following closely, food safety will be guaranteed.