【New News】How the U.S., Japan, Europe, and China Handle Food Safety Crises: A Comparative Analysis Revealing Taiwan's Unique Challenges

An ancient proverb states, 'The law is like a furnace'—a metaphor describing how national laws should be as red-hot and impartial as a burning stove, leaving no room for leniency. This phrase appears in the Song Dynasty text Jingben Tongsu Xiaoshuo: Pusa Man: 'The law is like a furnace; who would show mercy?' It is also echoed in Guan Hanqing’s Yuan Dynasty play The Butterfly Dream: 'Even iron cannot withstand the law as a furnace.' The message is clear: the law burns anyone who touches it, and no one, especially those in power, should escape its reach. The principle is simple—just as citizens must obey the law, so too must government officials.

Yet, in practice, we often see the opposite: 'Only the governor is allowed to set fires, but the common people are forbidden to light lamps.' Businesses face immediate punishment for violations, while public officials guilty of negligence face only internal 'administrative reviews' with no real consequences. This creates a two-tiered system—placing the scorching furnace before the public while quietly leaving a back door open for bureaucrats. Such a system violates the core democratic and legal principles of accountability and equality before the law.

This article consistently argues: 'The law must burn equally for businesses and for civil servants.' When it comes to food safety—a matter of public health and trust—both corporate actors and the regulators overseeing them must be held to the same standard. In the United States, the FDA can issue rapid recalls and pursue criminal charges, holding both companies and negligent officials accountable. Japan enforces strict oversight through coordinated efforts between the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and local governments, with potential criminal liability for public servants. The European Union relies on the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for independent scientific assessments, requiring member states to act swiftly based on its findings. China, following past food safety scandals, has intensified punishments and implemented top-down accountability, including the dismissal of local officials.

In contrast, Taiwan often swiftly penalizes businesses but rarely holds civil servants accountable. Even in cases of severe regulatory failure, disciplinary actions against officials are typically limited to warnings or pay cuts, with criminal prosecution being extremely rare. This disparity is not merely about the severity of punishment—it reflects a deeper gap in governance philosophy. The maturity of a rule-of-law society should be measured by how strictly it enforces accountability on those in power.

Food safety directly impacts citizens’ lives and health. A regulatory system that allows officials to operate above the law is no longer acceptable. For Taiwan and other nations to truly embody the spirit of 'the law as a furnace,' institutional reforms are essential. Only when both businesses and public servants stand equally before the fire can a trustworthy food safety system be built.