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)