论食品安全风险警示的法律规制

发布时间：2018-04-13 23:01

本文选题：风险警示 + 食品安全　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：从农田到餐桌是一个漫长的过程，这一过程的任何一个环节都可能潜藏食品安全问题。食品安全风险警示正是将特定食品潜在的不安全信息披露给消费者和有关方面。但是，由于食品安全风险具有复杂、广泛、不确定等特性，社会公众对于这些信息的理解和反映是不同的。作为公共管理和公共服务部门，政府有关行政机关发布食品安全风险警示信息是其职责所在。然而，遗憾的是，我国食品安全相关法律法规对食品安全风险警示的内涵没有进行科学界定，也未对发布规则、救济方式进行细化规定，这就很难保证风险警示的正确、合法。如果出现错误的食品安全风险警示，食品生产经营者的正常生产经营活动会受到严重影响，如何为对他们提供及时、有效的法律救济是一个值得研究的问题。本文主要运用材料收集法、实证分析法、对策分析法等研究方法对食品安全风险警示中的法律问题进行分析研究，并提出相应对策，以期对食品安全风险警示进行制度上的细化与完善，平衡国家卫生行政部门风险警示公布职责与经营者合法利益之间的冲突，保证受到侵害的生产经营者得到合法救济。本文第一部分是案例简述和法律问题的发现。通过对广州“毒水果”案和农夫山泉“总砷超标”案的简单介绍，指出了我国食品安全风险警示误报频发，严重损害生产经营者利益，其合法性受到质疑，风险警示的发布处于混乱状态，监管部门的发布行为急需进行规范。第二部分是我国食品安全风险警示法律问题的成因。食品安全风险警示法律问题丛生主要有三方面的原因。第一，对监管部门发布的警示信息定性不明，风险警示的内涵未明确界定；第二，，食品安全风险警示发布的具体规则不完善，具体指出了风险警示发布主体不清晰、发布条件与时机不确定、发布的前置沟通程序与空间效力规范缺位是造成风险警示发布行为混乱的原因；第三，发布错误的食品安全风险警示的救济途径缺失，具体来说，食品安全风险警示作为行政事实行为，其救济方式，包括行政复议、行政诉讼和国家赔偿的适用均因存在阻碍条款导致救济不力，是使受到错误风险警示侵害的生产经营者无法得到及时救济的原因。第三部分是我国食品安全风险警示法律问题的解决思路。首先,明确界定了风险警示的内涵、特征；其次,对风险警示发布的具体规则进行了细化规定，具体来说，规范了风险警示发布主体及权限，规定了风险警示发布的顺序；确定了风险警示发布的目的、事实及程度条件，确定了除国家卫生行政部门直接向公众发布信息外，没有其他替代性措施或其他措施无法达到如同直接发布信息所能达到的效果以保障公众生命安全与健康之时为发布警示的时机；制定食品安全风险警示发布的前置沟通程序，在对风险警示进行等级划分的基础上，制定风险警示的空间效力规范。最后,对发布错误的风险警示的救济方式进行了完善。包括，将“具体行政行为”修改为“行政职权行为”，扩大行政复议的范围，扩大行政诉讼的受案范围，使风险警示这一行政事实行为能够运用行政复议和行政诉讼进行救济；在具体的行政赔偿中加大结果归责原则的运用，改变国家赔偿的赔偿标准，使发布错误的风险警示的国家赔偿救济方式能够得到更好地适用。
[Abstract]:From farm to table is a long process, any link of this process may have potential food safety problem. Food safety risk warning is the specific food potentially unsafe information disclosure to consumers and the relevant aspects. However, due to the food safety risk is complicated, extensive, uncertain characteristics of society the public to understand and reflect on these information is different. As the public management and public service departments, relevant administrative organs of government issued food safety risk warning information is its duty. However, unfortunately, the relevant laws and regulations on food safety of our country food safety risk warning connotation no scientific definition, nor to the release rules, remedy detailed provisions, it is difficult to ensure that the correct legal risk warning, warning of food safety risk. If there is wrong, the food production operators The normal production and operation activities will be seriously affected. How to provide timely and effective legal relief for them is a problem worthy of study.
This paper mainly uses the material collection method, empirical analysis method, analysis and Research on the legal problems of food safety risk warning research in the countermeasure analysis method, and puts forward some corresponding countermeasures, in order to food safety risk warning system to refine and perfect the balance of the national health administrative departments released risk warning conflict between legal interests and responsibilities the operator, ensure the violation of legal relief production operators.
The first part is the case description and the legal problems found. Through the brief introduction of Guangzhou "poison fruit" and "Nongfushangquan total arsenic exceed the standard" case, pointed out that China's food safety risk warning alarm frequently, serious damage to the interests of producers and operators, its legitimacy is questioned, risk warning issued in a state of confusion. Release behavior in urgent need of regulators to regulate.
The second part is the causes of legal problems of food safety risk warning in our country. Legal problems of food safety risk warning with three main reasons. First, the regulatory authorities released the qualitative warning information is unknown, not clearly defining the connotation of risk warning; second, food safety risk warning issued specific rules is not perfect, specifically pointed out the risk warning issued subject is not clear, release conditions and timing uncertainty, released pre communication procedures and the spatial effect is caused by the lack of standardized risk warning issued chaotic behavior; third, food safety risk warning issued the wrong way of relief is missing, specifically, food safety risk warning as the administrative fact behavior, the relief the way, including administrative reconsideration, administrative litigation and state compensation are due to the presence of blocking clause led to inadequate relief, is caused by the wrong risk The cause of timely relief can not be obtained by the producers who have warned against them.
The third part is the ideas to solve the legal problems of food safety risk warning in China. Firstly, defines the connotation, characteristics of risk warning; secondly, the specific rules of risk warning issued detailed provisions, specifically, standardize the risk warning issued subject and authority, the provisions of the risk warning issued to determine the order; risk warning issued to determine the degree of facts and conditions, in addition to the health administrative department of the state directly to the public release of information, no other alternative measures or other measures can be reached as direct release information can be achieved in order to ensure the safety and health of the public life as warning issued in time; the development of food safety risk warning the pre release communication program, based on the classification of the risk warning, risk warning effect making space standard. Finally, the issue of false The risk warning remedies were perfect. Including, the specific administrative act is amended as "administrative act", expand the scope of administrative reconsideration, expand the scope of administrative litigation, the risk warning the administrative fact behavior can use the administrative reconsideration and the administrative litigation are used in specific administrative relief; the increase compensation imputation principle, change of state compensation standard of compensation, to publish false warning of the risk of the national compensation relief can be better applied.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.16

【参考文献】