Purpose: one case question per HAS/SJPH criterion — 5 questions, 10 marks each (50 total) — to test whether a candidate can turn a situation into findings, criterion by criterion.
Language note: written without Chinese characters by design; materials and documents are named in English (pinyin only where an industry term has no clean English equivalent) so mixed-language teams can use the same paper. Answers may be given in English or Bahasa Indonesia.
How to use: closed book, ~90 minutes, answers in note form are acceptable. Answer keys are in §7 — detach before issuing.
1. Criterion 1 — Commitment and Responsibility (10 marks)
Scenario. A fruit-juice concentrate maker in China applies for certification. Its appointed halal supervisor is the QC manager: she is Muslim, holds a signed job description, and was appointed by decree. She has not taken the halal supervisor competency exam and is not registered in the national halal system. The halal policy is signed by the legal representative but carries no company seal and is not displayed anywhere in the plant. No internal halal training has ever been held, and the plant uses contracted workers who handle materials and packaging. The client says all of this can be “finished after the audit”.
Tasks. (a) List the non-conformities. (b) State the evidence you request for each. (c) Explain why this criterion blocks the timeline rather than merely lowering a score.
2. Criterion 2 — Materials (10 marks)
Scenario. A bread-improver manufacturer submits its material list: flour, salt, sugar, a mono- and di-glyceride emulsifier whose specification says only “vegetable origin” with no breakdown of which fat, a flavor carrying 40% ethanol as solvent dosed at 0.3% of the recipe, and an enzyme preparation made by fermentation at a plant that will not release its process flowchart. The client offers one halal certificate, issued by a body that does not appear on the current recognized-body list, and asks you to accept it for all four materials.
Tasks. (a) Assign each material to the correct level of the evidence decision tree. (b) State exactly what you must obtain for the emulsifier and the enzyme. (c) Decide the flavor: show the arithmetic and name the document that decides it.
3. Criterion 3 — Process / PPH (10 marks)
Scenario. At a noodle and pastry plant you find: the only process flowchart is a marketing diagram with no materials shown per step; the plant shares a warehouse with a tenant that stores pork products; the employee canteen cooks pork in the same building; a freezing and thawing room is shared with a non-halal line running alternate days; the batching records, when compared with purchase invoices and dispatch records over three months, do not reconcile for two products; and part of the volume is repacked at a second address that was never declared.
Tasks. (a) Identify the findings and the criterion element each one breaches. (b) Name the verification technique you use for the reconciliation problem and describe what a discrepancy would mean. (c) State what evidence would prove the process is genuinely halal.
4. Criterion 4 — Products (10 marks)
Scenario. A canned-food producer wants its range certified. Two problems stand out: one product is named after a beer-style dish (no alcohol in the recipe) and another carries a pig mascot on the pack, both with otherwise clean content; the label ingredient list uses collective names for fats, spices, additives and flavor; the client intends to print its domestic Chinese halal (qingzhen) mark on packs exported to Indonesia; the product photo set is incomplete; and a new product has been on sale for months without being added to the certificate appendix.
Tasks. (a) Which items pass and which fail, and why? (b) What must the client do about the collective names? (c) What is the correct labelling and product-list position for the Indonesian market?
5. Criterion 5 — Monitoring and Evaluation (10 marks)
Scenario. A company certified two years ago is due for surveillance. Its internal audit was performed by the production manager over his own area, using the food-safety checklist rather than a halal-specific one; the management review minutes are a single page that does not answer the criteria one by one and assigns no owners or deadlines; there is no corrective-action register — findings were “closed verbally”; four material changes were never reported, including two supplier-brand switches; and two material certificates expire within 60 days with no renewal planning.
Tasks. (a) Identify the non-conformities. (b) Describe what a compliant monitoring loop looks like for this company. (c) State what you do now as the auditor, and what you tell the client about the certificate.
6. Marking
| Band | Marks per question | Descriptor |
|---|---|---|
| Excellent | 9–10 | All findings identified, correctly attributed to the criterion, with the right evidence demanded and a clear decision |
| Good | 7–8 | Correct findings; one evidence requirement thin or one criterion element missed |
| Adequate | 5–6 | Recognises the problem but applies the rule mechanically or accepts weak evidence |
| Weak | 3–4 | Misses the decision boundaries (accepts a statement for animal-derived material, treats testing as proof) |
| Fail | 0–2 | Decides on goodwill; no evidence hierarchy |
| Total | 50 | Suggested pass mark 35/50 |
7. Answer keys
Criterion 1
- Supervisor competency and registration are mandatory: a supervisor who has not passed the recognized competency exam and is not registered blocks the file — check it at desk review, not on site. (3)
- The policy must be signed by top management and carry the company seal (unstamped documents are weak evidence) and must be displayed in production and warehouse areas — photographs in the file. (3)
- Training and socialization at least once a year, with records (agenda, attendance, materials, tests), and coverage must include new and contracted workers who touch production. (2)
- Team/supervisor decrees must be current with HR changes; a supervisor carrying production duties needs a defined, resourced job description. (1)
- Why it blocks: the whole system is owned by this person and this policy — an unregistered, untrained supervisor cannot operate the halal assurance system, so every later criterion inherits the gap. (1)
Sources: Criterion 1 §2–4 · Guide 01 §7
Criterion 2
- Certificate offered: not evidence unless the issuer is on the live recognized-body list at the audit date, the scope covers the exact supplier, product and validity, and it is checked per material — one certificate cannot cover four unrelated materials. (2)
- Emulsifier: the missing fact is which fat source (animal tallow or lard versus palm or soy). Accept a specification explicitly stating no animal origin and no porcine material, plus a declaration that no solvent, hydrolysis, fermentation or fining step occurs — but only for genuinely non-animal, physically processed material; otherwise certificate or replacement. Testing is supplementary only. (3)
- Enzyme: fermentation route = certificate territory; a flowchart alone is insufficient, because growth media can carry animal peptone. If no certificate, evidence the declared media list and carriers — or replace the enzyme. (2)
- Flavor: arithmetic 40% × 0.3% = 0.12% finished, within the 0.5% tolerance (operational max 0.49%) — but level is not the deciding question. The deciding document is the ethanol source declaration: khamr-origin alcohol is rejected at any level; non-khamr ethanol is acceptable only if source-declared and the dosage math is kept in the file. (3)
Sources: Criterion 2 §2, §4, §6 · Science 03 §5
Criterion 3
- Flowchart: a marketing diagram is not evidence; request the process flowchart held for the production licence, annotated with which material enters each step including processing aids and water, and verify it against the floor and the written work instructions. (2)
- Shared warehouse with pork storage, canteen cooking pork, shared freezing/thawing room: each is a contamination path to assess — segregation, airflow, doors, drains, staff movement, cleaning between uses (time-and-space segregation where equipment is shared). A shared room running a non-halal line on alternate days needs validated cleaning evidence. (3)
- Reconciliation: the strongest technique is the records reconciliation test — purchased volumes versus batching records versus dispatched/sold volumes for a sample window. Unexplained gaps point to unapproved materials, production outside the approved system, or paper compliance. (3)
- Repacking at an undeclared address: the site where goods are actually handled must be declared and audited; the licensed address and product-category annex must match reality. (1)
- What proves halal process: a flowchart matching reality with all inputs on the approved register, layout and segregation evidence, and a records trail that reconciles end to end, supported by batch traceability. (1)
Sources: Criterion 3 §2–5 · Guide 03 §3–4
Criterion 4
- Beer-style product name: fails the screen — names, forms and designs must not evoke khamr even when the content is clean. Pig mascot: fails — no pork references or pig imagery. Content being halal does not save either. (3)
- Collective names for fats, spices, additives and flavor hide animal origin and alcohol: request the underlying breakdown (which fat source, which additives, ethanol solvent?) and reconcile the label line by line with the approved material register. (3)
- Labelling: the domestic Chinese halal (qingzhen) mark is not the Indonesian halal logo — certified packs for Indonesia carry the national halal label. (2)
- Product list and photos: every certified product needs photographs with readable front and back labels, and the product list must match the certificate appendix; the product on sale but not submitted goes on the pending list until approved. (2)
Sources: Criterion 4 §2–4 · FAQ §4
Criterion 5
- Internal audit: must cover all 5 criteria on a halal-specific form and be performed by someone independent of the audited area — a line manager auditing his own area using a food-safety checklist does not satisfy it. (3)
- Management review: must be held at least annually, review implementation with top management, answer all 5 criteria from the internal-audit findings, and produce decisions with owners and deadlines. Signed one-page minutes without content are the classic failure. (3)
- Corrective actions: findings need a register with root cause, action, owner, deadline and verification of effectiveness; verbal closure is not closure. (1)
- Unreported changes: material and supplier-brand changes require pre-approval; unapproved changes are non-conformities even if the new materials are halal, and significant changes may trigger review or re-audit. (2)
- As the auditor: verify the expired/expiring certificates and re-check the issuing bodies on the live list; confirm which material was used during any gap; raise the findings, and tell the client that the certificate is a living obligation — the monitoring loop and change reporting are the duties that keep it valid, not paperwork to be finished at renewal. (1)
Sources: Criterion 5 §2–5 · Guide 05 §2–6
Map: Criterion 1 · Criterion 2 · Criterion 3 · Criterion 4 · Criterion 5 · Guide 05 · Quiz 01 — multiple-choice fundamentals · Kuis 03 — versi konteks Indonesia, dalam Bahasa Indonesia