The Supreme Law Responds to the "Poisonous Bean Sprout" Case for the First Time

After the relevant standards were revised, many sprouters were sentenced to death because of the unclear property and regulation of the bean sprouts.... After the report of the “Poisonous Bean Sprouts” case was reported at the end of September, the Information Bureau of the Supreme People’s Court recently responded to news that the relevant business units were Problems were studied, but progress was temporarily inconvenienced.

On the 12th of October, Wu Yuefang, the vice-premier of the State Council and Wang Yang, secretary general of the China Soy Products Committee of the Supreme People's Court, told the Xinhua News that her association was entrusted by the National Health and Family Planning Commission to draft and draft the “Standard for the Safety of Beans in Bean Sprouts”. At present, the first round of discussions has been completed, but due to the unclear property of bean sprouts, work progress has been slow.

News from Sept. 27 reported that 6-benzyl glands had been released from the list of "Guidelines for Food Additives" (GB2760) after being "as a plant growth regulator" due to "as a plant growth regulator" in 2011. The registration of purine and 4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid on bean sprouts has not been successfully “accepted” by the agricultural sector, and the latter believes that the cultivation of bean sprouts is not accepted as a “food production operation”. They became the existence of unknown gray, but it is the basis for the conviction and sentencing of the judiciary.

The “no identity” of bean sprouts production directly led to “no standards”. The national standards, landmarks, and industry standards with numerous names made the frontline judicial personnel “messy”. Under the charge of punishing food safety crimes, the “toxic bean sprouts” bear the brunt. The search for the "China Referee Document Network" under the Supreme Law is based on the keyword "The crime of poisonous and harmful food of bean sprouts". From January 1, 2013 to August 22, 2014, there were a total of 709 related cases, 918 of whom were punishment. The evidence in the verdict more mentioned "6-benzyl adenine detected in bean sprouts."

In Wu Yuefang's view, the crux of the “toxic bean sprouts” case is that “the attributes of the bean sprouts cultivation and development process are not clear, and the division of responsibilities of the administrative departments is unclear.” The disconnection of regulation led to the stigmatization of the above two chemicals to “poisons”, and the fact was that there was at least no scientific authority to prove that the two were toxic and hazardous non-food substances. On the contrary, a large number of scientific experiments proved that they and many plant growth regulators The same "safety and low toxicity."

Her China Soybean Products Committee has been to the Office of the Food Safety Commission, the Central Office, the former Ministry of Health (now the Health and Development Commission), the Ministry of Agriculture, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (the State Administration of Food and Drugs) and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce since 2011. (The current State Food and Drug Administration) and the Ministry of Public Security Bureau of Public Security and other six ministries sent a letter to reflect the issue of the safety supervision and regulation of the bean sprouts' production and production, and demanded that the supervision and administration of bean sprouts be made clear.

As a person in the industry, in early September 2014, she again sent personal materials to the relevant research office of the Supreme Law to “relevant laws and regulations concerning bean sprouts cases” in the name of the individual. Later in the same period, she again sent the Supreme Request for resolution of the "bean sprout case" proposal letter.

In the above-mentioned proposal letter, it was mentioned that so far, the production of bean sprouts has not been clearly regulated and caused no supervision. This is the reason why the so-called “toxic bean sprouts” cases have frequently occurred throughout the country.

The letter suggested to the Supreme Court that a study should be conducted on the basis for adjudicating the “toxic bean sprouts” case and correct the fact that the applicable laws and regulations are inaccurate.

After related news reports were published, Xinhua News Agency reported on September 28th that it had issued a commentary on the “toxic bean sprouts” controversy and stated that “bean sprouts are bean sprouts and supervision cannot be ignored”.

The article stated that “the relevant departments should really listen to the people’s voice on the issue of small bean sprouts, clarify the regulatory body and the standards of the food as soon as possible, on the one hand, escort the consumers’ table safety, and on the other hand, protect the producers’ Legal rights."

The Xinhua News Agency sent an interview letter to the Information Office of the Supreme People's Court on September 30th, hoping to learn about the progress of the dispute on the “toxic bean sprouts” case. The relevant personage of the Information Bureau of the Supreme People's Court recently responded to Xinhua News that the relevant business department of the Supreme Law had understood the issue and was studying it. Since no conclusion had been reached, progress was not readily disclosed.

Wu Yuefang told the Xinhua News that in May 2014, the National Health and Family Planning Commission formally issued the standard revision plan for the "Standard for the National Standard of Food Safety". Entrusted by the National Health and Family Planning Commission, her association will formulate the "National Standard for the Safety of Food Beans" at the end of 2015. This standard will be used as a supporting standard in the "Food Safety Law."

“The first discussion on the revision of the above-mentioned standards was held on July 11. The next round of discussions will begin in November.” Wu Yuefang said that compared with previous product standards, the biggest change in this revision is the plan. The bean sprouts production standard was supplemented as an appendix to solve the problem of having no standards in the past. But in this way, the face of the "old problem": what is the property of bean sprouts? Who is responsible for the management of the additives used in the production?

Wu Yuefang looks forward to her letter of communication can be found below. However, the difficulty is also obvious. China's food segmentation management has a long history. "The supervision of bean sprouts is actually a test of China's food safety supervision. If we can handle it properly, seamless supervision of food safety will be another step."

“It is very difficult to rely on coordination among ministries and commissions to solve problems. Although the State Food and Drug Administration is actively communicating with the Ministry of Agriculture, the progress is slow. To solve this problem as soon as possible, only rely on the State Council responsible for these departments to instruct the relevant departments to similarly The management of the production process of bean sprouts, such as bean sprouts, is divided into tasks," said Wu Yuefang.

At the same time, they are also considering “curves to save the country”: if they cannot be solved in the short term, can they be obfuscated in the standard, not mentioning attributes, and only allowed as “additives”? "But whether this program is feasible requires final approval by the Food Safety Review Committee."