Probe can get to root of case
difference between the traditional Chinese medicinal herb and its new offspring may confuse the public since it is to do with the specialist field of plant taxonomy, which requires professional knowledge to understand. But, the public can easily understand the process by which the name of the medicinal plant has been changed, as it reflects a redistribution of interests. Moreover, whether such a process is normal and fair is of great concern to the public nowadays.
there was corruption involved in the Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission’s action of renaming the Chinese name of Japanese honeysuckle is still as yet unknown. However, we need to be on high alert for such forms of corruption. In reality, although it may be an isolated case of individuals getting illegal benefits by establishing a new rule, the situation of departments legalizing their interests in such a way exists elsewhere.
Compared to administrative and judicial corruption, such legislative corruption usually has an indirect effect on the public, so it is easily neglected. But it can do great harm to society as legislation is the first weapon in the fight against injustice. Laws and regulations are just special public products that protect society, they must not be exclusively used for serving interest groups in China.
smooth running of the economy needs to be safeguarded by the law, and the law requires facts supported by evidence. Whether the renaming of the plant by the Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission involved corruption needs to be judged by law, and the final conclusion should be investigated and proved by the facts. Besides attracting public attention, it is hoped that the two sides in this case will use the legal system to determine whether it is a case of corruption or not. Only through facts and evidence will the public be fully convinced.
name whistle-blower’s accusation has drawn great attention. In fact, the academic issue of whether there is a case for renaming the medicinal herb or not may remain unsettled in the short term, but the discipline inspection departments and police can clearly investigate if there is corruption involved. Therefore, instead of online debate, progress should be made through a proper investigation.
The incident has also served the valuable function of reminding the public sector that such instances of online whistle-blowers are not necessarily damaging if the accusations can be swiftly and reasonably refuted. In such a case it could help an honest enterprise secure people’s trust. As for the final result of this case, it still needs investigating to give us a final conclusion.