The humidifier disinfectant case and the legislative challenges of the 20th Congress

Abstract

A number of absurdities surrounding the humidifier disinfectant (HD) incident may have occurred because 1) a judicial system operates on the underlying false assumption that the involved parties are equals in knowledge, information and resource mobilization capabilities, regardless of respective real status as company or individual; 2) there is a lack of a system that mandates a company to prevent and actively manage possible catastrophes; 3) the regulatory scheme makes companies believe that as long as they are complying with the existing regulations, they have satisfied all of their responsibilities. I believe that this issue is an opportunity to bring about changes in the judicial redress system, the system of internal management of manufacturers, and the regulatory system of the government. The following regulation amendments are needed to move towards the changes stated above. First, legislation relating to victim relief that is applicable to the HD incident must be established. Second, a risk management system must be formed within the manufacturing company and to this end an institutional environment for the system must be established within regulatory framework. Furthermore, legislation must be passed that could punish companies themselves that have caused severe damage to individuals because they had failed to take necessary actions to avoid foreseeable harm. Finally, the framework of regulation must be changed so that the company, who has the necessary information regarding the product and the component chemicals used in the product, must self-directed experiment and assessment of the safety of their own products.

Keywords

• Enterprise risk management system
• Humidfier disinfectant
• Hazard review
• Judicial relief system