全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

预防性环境民事公益诉讼启动标准研究
Research on the Starting Standards of Preventive Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigation Arbitration

DOI: 10.12677/OJLS.2023.114395, PP. 2757-2764

Keywords: 《环保法》,公益诉讼,预防性,启动标准
Environmental Protection Law
, Public Interest Litigation, Prevention, Launch Criteria

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

“保护优先、预防为主”是2014年修订的《环保法》确立的我国环境保护的基本原则。之后,最高人民法院于2020年1月颁布施行的《关于审理环境民事公益诉讼案件适用法律若干问题的解释》,第一条规定了,具有损害社会公共利益重大风险的污染环境、破坏生态的行为可以向法院提起诉讼。从中可以看出国家对于生态环境的预防保护之意,将生态环境损害的风险消灭在萌芽状态,最大限度的保护社会公益。然而,由于现行法律规范关于预防性环境民事公益诉讼规定的模糊,限制现有环境司法实践受案,导致错过环境救济的最佳时机,其实际效用的发挥有待研究。本文的研究旨在基于现有的法理基础从理念与制度两个方面来明晰预防性环境民事公益诉讼的启动标准,助益该制度的理解与适用。
The basic principle of environmental protection in China, established by the 2014 revised Envi-ronmental Protection Law, is “prioritizing protection and prioritizing prevention”. Subsequently, in January 2020, the Supreme People’s Court issued and implemented the “Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigation Cases”. Article 1 stipulates that actions that pollute the environment or damage the ecology with significant risks of damaging social and public interests can be brought to the court for litigation. From this, it can be seen that the country’s intention to prevent and protect the ecological environment is to eliminate the risk of ecological damage in its infancy and maximize the protection of social public welfare. However, due to the vague provisions on preventive environmental civil public interest litigation in current legal norms, which limit the acceptance of existing environmental judicial practices, the best opportunity for environmental relief is missed, and the actual effectiveness needs to be studied. The purpose of this study is to clarify the initiation criteria for preventive environmental civil public interest litigation from both conceptual and institutional perspectives based on existing legal foundations, in order to facilitate the understanding and application of this system.

References

[1]  吴凯杰. 论预防性检察环境公益诉讼的性质定位[J]. 中国地质大学学报(社会科学版), 2021(1): 30-44.
[2]  陈春生. 行政法之学理与体系[M]. 台北: 三民书局, 1996: 183.
[3]  张洋, 毋爱斌. 论预防性环境民事公益诉讼中“重大风险”的司法认定[J]. 中国环境管理, 2020(2): 138-144.
[4]  廖丽环. 预防性环境民事公益诉讼的规范构造——以《关于审理环境民事公益诉讼案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第1条为中心[J]. 北京科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 37(1): 66-73.
[5]  Richard, J., Pierce, J., Sidney, A., et al. (1985) Administrative Law and Process. The Foundation Press, New York.
[6]  金自宁. 风险中的行政法[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2014: 78.
[7]  董斌. 环境民事公益诉讼中预防性责任适用规则的优化路径[J]. 中国环境管理, 2019, 11(5): 121-126.
[8]  程春明, 李蔚, 宋旭. 生态环境大数据建设的思考[J]. 中国环境管理, 2015, 7(6): 9-13.
[9]  张璐. 容忍义务的扩张与限缩——以容忍义务为参照的环境权理论批判与重塑[J]. 甘肃政法学院学报, 2015(6): 67-77.
[10]  奚晓明. 《中华人民共和国环境保护法》条文理解与适用[M]. 北京: 人民法院出版社, 2014: 305.
[11]  华蕴志. 论预防性环境公益诉讼的功能界分——以多中心环境治理模式为分析工具[C]//上海市法学会. 《上海法学研究》集刊(2020年第14卷)——中国法学会环境资源法学研究会文集. [出版者不详], 2020: 177.
[12]  陈海嵩. 风险预防原则理论与实践反思——兼论风险预防原则的核心问题[J]. 北方法学, 2010, 4(3): 11-18.
[13]  李辉.论司法能动主义[M]. 北京: 中国法制出版社, 2012: 109.
[14]  王彬. 法律现实主义视野下的司法决策——以美国法学为中心的考察[J]. 法学评论, 2018, 33(5): 74-85.
[15]  李启家. 环境法领域利益冲突的识别与衡平[J]. 法学评论, 2015(6): 134-140.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133