Research On The Legal Control Mechanism Of Responsibility Interview In The Field Of Food Safety

After the revision of food safety law in 2015,the responsibility appointment system was added to the supervision and management department,and the concept of responsibility appointment was proposed for the first time in the formal legal level.According to the provisions of this law,it can be clear that the emergence of the accountability appointment system in the field of food safety conforms to the direction of the supervision and control before and during the food safety.In order to ensure the realization of the effect of supervision in advance,the liability interview in this law is not only a simple interview,but a warning and warning should be given,involving the responsibility bearing of food production and operation enterprises.Therefore,the system of liability interview should have the following two points: first,it needs to have legal and clear application situation,that is,the judgment standard of "there is potential safety hazard" should be clarified;Second,we need to balance the interference between the freedom of food production and operators and the legitimacy of intervention behavior,that is,the administrative organ needs to demonstrate the legitimacy of the means adopted in advance to ensure the realization of the purpose of the interview.Through the induction of the food safety law and its subordinate law,the application of the liability interview can be divided into two categories: one is the liability interview to warn the illegal acts;Second,the responsibility interview for the prevention of safety hazards.At the same time,in order to ensure the realization of the purpose of the appointment,the administrative organ will take six measures to restrict the object of the appointment after the appointment.These measures will have two influences on the subject of the interview: first,directly impairing the substantive rights of the interviewee;Second,the substantive rights of the subject matter are not directly impaired.According to the legislative purpose of the responsibility interview system in the field of food safety and the specific legal norms,there is a dislocation between the actual and the actual.Specifically: first,the application of liability appointment in different legal norms is not divided on the same logical level,and there is a mixed and cross relationship.This leads to the fact that some behaviors are difficult to classify and the starting standards under the specific application conditions are difficult to judge.Secondly,when the administrative organ makes an appointment on responsibility,the food producers and operators have not yet committed illegal acts or have committed illegal acts,but they have not yet reached the level of administrative punishment and administrative compulsion.Therefore,in the due course,the disciplinary measures can not be taken directly to the food production and management enterprises.However,the measures taken by administrative organs to ensure the realization of the purpose of the interview will result in the reduction of the substantive rights of the object being interviewed.Therefore,in order to improve the system of responsibility negotiation in food safety field,the following contents should be achieved: first,the application of responsibility negotiation should be reconstructed,which can be divided into two types:the responsibility negotiation of illegal warning and the discussion of prevention and control responsibility.At the same time,it is necessary to define the starting standards under different application situations.The degree of illegal acts should be defined in the contract of responsibility for violation of laws and regulations.In the discussion of prevention and control responsibility,the discretion standard of safety hazards should be defined.Secondly,we need to make clear the way of handling the responsibility appointment and the intensity of the treatment of the differentiated liability appointment to guarantee the legal effect of the liability appointment.Thirdly,the responsibility interview attaches great importance to the construction of the process of the interview,but the emphasis of procedure construction is different under two different application situations.In the discussion of the responsibility of illegal warning,the administrative organ must fully explain the necessity of the initiation of the contract.Compared with the preventive and control type liability,the discretion of administrative organs is restricted to a greater extent in the contract of duty of illegal warning.In the discussion of preventive and control responsibility,the administrative organ should take action even under uncertain circumstances.The administrative organ needs to exercise its discretion in substance.Finally,whether it is the contract of responsibility of illegal warning or the appointment of preventive and control responsibility,the connection between different legal procedures should be strengthened.Administrative investigation should be regarded as the pre procedure to start the liability appointment,and it is clear that the liability appointment shall not replace administrative punishment and administrative compulsion.