The Study Of The Crime About Food Safety Supervision

Well-known "Sudan event" in the country set off an uproar on food safety, and thegreat dangers of the SanLu milk powder incident shock the nerves of everyone. In thelater, such as "poison bean sprouts event","lean event","poison bread events" havebeen exposured is to shack the nervers of the ordinary consumer. Ii is true that so manyincidents of food safety incidents related with the producers, but also with the peoplewho have the duty to supervise the safety of the food. There are series of difficulties toidentify the crimes of the some people, so it brings many difficulties to the judicialpractice.This article has been divided into three parts, the first part of the writing is theoverview of food safety-related crime. And the characteristics of the food safety crimes.In recent years, China’s food security situation is not optimistic and characteristicsshowing a food safety accidents, the number of food safety incidents involved, thesocial harm associated with the misconduct of the related staff of state organs.The second part is the food safety problems of dereliction of duty. The main contentof the subjective as follows: identification of sins, indentification the quality of themalpractices, the causation, and the food regulatory offense of misconduct identified.(A)in the subjective sin identification problem on the subjective sin of the crime of abuse ofpower and dereliction of duty is difficult to distinguish the sin problem for the crime ofabuse of power, it was considered as intentional, that negligence, even more peoplethink that have intentional and negligent. Dereliction of duty on the sin problem, somepeople think its abuses and crimes intentionally, and some people think we should onlyfault.(B) the nature of the "favoritism" and "fraud" and identified, some peopleadvocate "favoritism" for the elements of the crime, it was denied for the elements ofthe crime. Agree with the premise of favoritism for the elements of the crime has itssubjective elements and objective elements of controversy. In addition, whether orfavoritism, including Love, favoritism include martyrdom unit private parties, isdebated.(C) Causation is the existence of difficulties, especially in more than one fruit,mostly due to more fruit and food regulatory intervention factor exists in the case ofdereliction of duty, causal relationship is difficult to define.(D) Crime in the foodregulatory malfeasance, then there exists a phase difference between the standards with other dereliction of duty, the ’standard identification difficulties of subjective sin issues.The third part is the judicial determination of the food safety of dereliction ofduty.The main content of the subjective sin to correctly define the crime of abuse ofpower and dereliction of duty, the nature of favoritism and fraud and concluded that thecorrect definition of dereliction of duty, causal relationship between food safety, theright to define the content of the food regulatory offense of misconduct in four areas.(A)correctly define the subjective sin of the crime of abuse of power and dereliction of duty,in part through the analysis of the views of other scholars to come to abuse of power onthe Crime of intentional dereliction of duty on the Crime of negligence.(B) the natureand Confirmation of favoritism and fraud, favoritism, fraud is a statutory Elements offavoritism, and a motive for the crime, fraud is the objective elements of the constituentelements. Favoritism should also include private martyrdom unit.(C) the correctdefinition of dereliction of duty, causal relationship between food safety. This sectionmade a more specific description of all points of the judgment the existence of a fruit ormore fruit in case of causality, there is causal relationship between factors intervention,fault of food regulatory dereliction of duty, causal relationship.(D) correctly define thefood regulatory malfeasance crime. Distinguished from other dereliction of duty restswith dereliction of duty and whether it occurs in the field of food safety regulation, anddereliction of duty, misconduct is causing major food safety accidents or other seriousconsequences. Can refer to other malfeasance crime ’standard’ standards. But should besubject to the constraints of the following two conditions. One for dereliction of duty byreference to the penalty should be higher than or equal to the food safety supervisionand dereliction of duty, the penalty of sin. The other is the reference to ’investigated thecase of dereliction of duty must be the case with food safety incidents. Guilty of thecrime problem in the food regulatory malfeasance, the legislation is unscientific andprone to controversy, sub-section of the legislation is the most rational choice.