亚洲精品久久久久久一区二区_99re热久久这里只有精品34_久久免费高清视频_一区二区三区不卡在线视频

A doctorate law student has taken court action against the Ministry of Health over the problematic certification of a chewing gum by the National Committee for Oral Health (NCOH), which is under the ministry's auspices.

The NCOH was originally approved by the Ministry of Health in the late 1980s as a dental expert group to provide advice for policy-making on oral health. It has done a great deal in promoting oral health among citizens and has certified products like toothpaste and gum for oral health before 2003, when the country's regulations on product certification took effect.

It is an undeniable fact that the NCOH has never been given the authority by the Certification and Accreditation Administration of China to certify products concerning oral health after the certification regulations took effect.

The plaintiff discovered that the certification by the NCOH of a gum had expired and then questioned the authenticity of the NCOH for the certification of oral health products.

The response from the NCOH was self-contradictory. It admitted that the NCOH was not an authorized institution for certification and accreditation, but insisted that its certification of oral health products was justifiable.

Instead of explaining why its certification was not illegal, the NCOH said that it had consulted the Ministry of Health and the certification and accreditation administration after the certification rules took effect, and was told by both higher authorities that the certification by the NCOH was not illegal although it was not an authorized certification and accreditation institution.

The explanation by the NCOH does not hold water.

Under the rule of law, the Ministry of Health does not have the right to say whether the certification by the NCOH is justifiable or not and neither does the certification and accreditation administration.

The fact that the NCOH is not authorized as an institution to certify oral health products proves explicitly that the certification by it is illegal.

If both higher authorities did give the nod to the NCOH, what they have done should be deemed an act of bending the law.

Even if the certification of oral health products by the NCOH was considered acceptable before the certification rules took effect in November 2003, the new regulations should have nullified its authenticity for certification unless it was authorized by relevant authorities.

It is quite fair that its certification be considered invalid, to say nothing of the fact that the certification before 2003 has already expired.

(China Daily April 13, 2006)