So is that broken out in a mucky war of the jutland fiskeforædlingsindustri, where a few groups compete hard for lucrative market share.
One of the country's greatest actors, Amanda Seafoods in Frederikshavn, is of a person in the industry have been notified to Fødevarekontrollen for systematically defrauding the danes, when under the brand Glyngøre claim that fiskefars is made of fresh fish.
Coup - 24. jun. 2020 - pm. 11:37 After the case of fiskefup: They should be punished
In the industry at all, that it is deboned fish which has been frozen, after which it is processed to the father, as the danes kinds of fishcakes.
So there has been gossiped.
Amanda Seafoods, which is owned by the group Insula, have of controls scored a penalty and told to stop fupnummeret, but refuses to continue after a lost appeal over the claim in Fødevareklagenævnet.
Fiskegiganten maintains that it is legal to call fiskesfars made on the thawed fish 'fresh fresh'.
So Amanda Seafoods management rages and will sue Fødevarekontrollen, where an employee, according to documents in the case is accused of being buddy with the reviewer, as Fødevarekontrollen refuses to tell who it is.
Fødevaremyndighederne have anonymised the notifier, so Amanda Seafoods/Insula must not know who the person is. Photo: From public access/Danish veterinary and food administration
'That pop almost associated images from the Godfather-the film,' writes Amanda Seafoods' ceo, Jesper Kold Sørensen.
He may be right in that some in the industry are using ugly methods.
Fødevarekontrollen have accepted the reviewer's argument that he risks terrible retaliation.
'Reviewer referred (to Fødevarekontrollen) to a specific case, where a person in fiskebranchen had notified the other person in the fiskebranchen, which resulted in that those people smoke at each other's throats, who were thrown stones through the windows, including a single shooting incident, in which no persons were affected,' stands there in it's refusal, Amanda Seafoods got, and Ekstra Bladet have read.
Fødevarekontrollen: Therefore, anonymizes, we notifier
the Extra Leaf has asked the head of the Fødevarekontrollens team, the former vicekriminalinspektør Michael Rosenmark, though it could be a robber story, where the notifier, in order to achieve anonymity, says that he would risk serious reprisals.
- It thinks we do not. We take forbrugeranmeldelser seriously, and it is important for us that people come with tips and reviews. The cherish also on the interest of society, to the people, which thus helps us in our work by coming up with important information, do not have to fear getting in trouble.
- Is there not a risk that Denmark develops into a stikkersamfund, if anyone can report a company for anything without subsequently being held accountable, because yesterday to anonymize them?
- You can be penalized for submitting a false notification, so if the person in the case had provided the wrong information, it could have resulted in criminal actions.
- But have you looked if it is really true, that a reviewer risks highly unpleasant retaliation?
- Our experience based on previous cases is that the reviewers can experience unpleasant reprisals. We believe that he might be looked at and lose customers, and we put the most weight on. But we claim absolutely not - and it makes the reviewer did not - that the Insula (Amanda Seafoods, red.) even be able to find to commit retaliation against the reviewer.
- It could come from others in the industry.
- But why settled In not Insulas urges the request to obtain the notifier's identity?
- It is søreme important for us to comply with the law, so companies, which may prepare an appeal, can get access to relevant documents. Therefore, we have also asked the Snake, why they believe it is important to ascertain the identity of the notifier.
And this case was about, that they write the fresh fish at the fish that isn't fresh. It is our justification for giving a warning notice for misleading. So we find a fact, which is independent of the notifier's identity.
- So, our assessment is that the company in relation to the crux of the matter, namely the decoy, does not have any legitimate interest to be informed of the identity. His identity can not be used in the complaint of indskærpelsen.
He rejects the clearest, to an employee should be friends with the notifier. Ekstra Bladet have also not seen the claim substantiated.Show more Close
- the Case is for several reasons inflamed, says Jesper Kold Sørensen, who claims that Fødevarekontrollen previously approved by the fiskefarsen could be labelled with the 'fresh'. Something like the controls clearly rejects.
He feels 'criminalised for a claim, as the whole industry proven to have used in over 20 years,' as he expresses it.
- Then we can't get access to documents in the notifier's identity, and it is very strange. The reasons are as taken out of a bad movie, he seems.
- Allegations of retaliation is to ridicule, demonize and criminalize a serious industry. We are shocked, he says, and insists that he will know who the reviewer is.
- We will know the motive; whether it is a concerned consumer, or whether it is merely a notifier, who has a commercial interest. If it is a consumer, we take it quite seriously. If it is a professional industry recognized person who will annoy us, it is also essential for us to know, he says.
--------- SPLIT ELEMENT ---------
Picture: Amanda SeafoodsFish-boss: Frozen fish is fresh
Ekstra Bladet has asked Amanda Seafoods' ceo, Jesper Kold Sørensen, why he believes that fish that have been frozen, can be placed on the market as fresh fiskefars?
- It is fresh, fresh produce that will be frozen and defrosted up to stabilize the product, therefore avoid the bacteria.
- you Can understand, if some consumers are wondering that you call it fresh fiskefars, when it has been frozen?
- the Claim has been this way for over 20 years. Consumers know the product. So, we do not believe it is misleading.
- As In going out from, that consumers know that the so-called fresh fish has been frozen?
- No, the depth of information has the average consumer does not. They don't know that fiskefars is made on a frozen commodity, but if you explain to them that it is because of food security, they accept it.
- If I ask consumers whether they think Fresh Fish Fiskefars has been frozen, what do you think they will respond?
- It would probably surprise the man in the street.
- But why write In so that it has been frozen?
- We could have written that used frozen ingredients. So, there had not been any case.
- Why did not it?
We followed the customary, which is in the market. We put us up at the standard and have not had the consideration to do it differently.