我国环境民事公私益诉讼的并行与融合
作者:
中图分类号:

D925.1;D922.68


Parallel and integration of environmental civil public-private interest litigation in China
Author:
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献 [19]
  • |
  • 相似文献 [20]
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    当前,在我国法律体系内环境民事公私益诉讼采用了并行模式。并行模式关注于环境公共利益与私人利益的差异性,从而进行有针对性的利益维护。这虽然看似诉讼目的明确,符合环境权益救济需求,但其实际忽视了环境的整体性特征,不但不利于案件事实的梳理,而且容易造成司法资源的浪费甚至可能出现相互矛盾的裁判。面对并行模式存在的弊端,我国部分学者提出了强制合并、混合并存、另赋实体请求权、诉讼信托、诉讼担当等环境民事公私益诉讼的融合模式,上述模式分别从诉的合并和诉讼实施权融合两个方面对融合方式进行了探讨,但是其中仍存在当事人诉讼选择权忽视、公私益失衡以及责任重复认定等问题。随着生态文明建设的不断推进,人们对美好生活的需要促使更多的人开始关注环境质量,环境公益诉讼的数量日渐增多。基于环境问题的关联性、潜伏性特征以及环境侵害发生的阶段性机理,环境诉讼中环境公共利益与私人利益的交叉使得环境民事公私益诉讼的融合成为应然趋势。在尊重环境整体性特征的基础上,以追求环境公共利益与私人利益的平衡为原则,结合我国实际,以具备中国特色的检察制度作为枢纽,充分利用检察机关的监督权以及环境民事公益诉讼起诉权,构建环境民事公私益诉讼的新融合模式,将有利于诉讼目的实现。新融合模式强调发挥检察机关的公益诉讼效能,争取将同一事实产生的公私益诉求在同一时段提出,并依据诉的合并将两者合并审理,继而,在进行责任认定时,关注公私益交融之处,实现责任公平分配。新融合模式尊重了当事人的诉讼权利,避免了责任的重复认定,节约诉讼资源的同时提升了诉讼效率,不失为环境民事公私益诉讼的理想选择。当然,该模式尚处于理论初探阶段,要想真正具备实践性还需要在自诉讼制度、监督机制以及协作配合等多个层面进行建设构想,从而为环境诉讼的进一步研究奠定基础。

    Abstract:

    At present, the parallel mode of environmental civil public-private interest litigation is adopted in China's legal system. The parallel model focuses on the difference between public and private interests of the environment so as to carry out targeted interest maintenance. Although it seems that the purpose of the lawsuit is clear and meets the needs of environmental rights and interests relief, it actually ignores the overall characteristics of the environment, not only is not conducive to sorting out the facts of the case, but also easy to cause the waste of judicial resources and even contradictory judgments. Facing the disadvantages of the parallel mode, some scholars in China put forward the fusion mode of compulsory merger, mixed coexistence, additional entity claim right, litigation trust, litigation responsibility of environmental civil public-private interest litigation. The fusion mode is discussed from the two aspects of litigation merger and litigation enforcement right fusion respectively. But there are still some problems, such as the neglect of the litigant's right to choose, the imbalance of public and private interests and the repeated identification of responsibility. With the continuous progress of ecological civilization construction, people's need for a better life prompts more people to pay attention to environmental quality, and the number of environmental public interest lawsuits is increasing day by day. Based on the correlation, latent characteristics of environmental problems and the staged mechanism of environmental infringement, the intersection of environmental public interest and private interest in environmental litigation makes the integration of environmental civil public-private interest litigation an inevitable trend. In respect for the integrity of environment, taking the balance of environmental public interest and private interest as the principle, combined with the reality of China, with the procuratorial system with Chinese characteristics as a hub, making full use of the supervision power and the environmental civil public interest litigation right of the procuratorial organs, to establish a new fusion model of environmental civil public-private interest litigation will be good for realizing the litigation purposes. The new integration model emphasizes the public interest litigation efficiency of procuratorial organs, strives to put forward public and private interest claims generated by the same fact in the same period of time, and hears them together according to the combination of lawsuits. Then, in the identification of responsibility, attention should be paid to the integration of public and private interest, so as to realize the fair distribution of responsibility. The new integration mode respects the litigant's litigation rights, avoids the repeated identification of liability, saves litigation resources and improves litigation efficiency, which can be regarded as an ideal choice for environmental civil public-private interest litigation. Of course, this model is still in the preliminary stage of theory, and it needs to be constructed from the litigation system, supervision mechanism and cooperation in order to be truly practical, so as to lay a foundation for further research on environmental litigation.

    参考文献
    [1] 刘志坚,丁国民.大数据视野下环境侵权诉讼证据制度的优化[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2018(6):138-146.
    [2] 杨丽梅.环境侵权诉讼中惩罚性赔偿的适用[N].人民法院报,2018-11-28(007).
    [3] 邱秋.公共信托原则的发展与绿色财产权理论的建构[J].法学评论,2009(6):25-31.
    [4] 秦怡然.论环境民事公益诉讼与私益诉讼的衔接[C]//区域环境资源综合整治和合作治理法律问题研究:2017年全国环境资源法学研讨会(2017.8.25-27·河北保定)论文集,2017:712-719.
    [5] 史玉成,郭武.环境法的理论更新与制度重构[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2010:75.
    [6] 邓海峰.生态法治的整体主义自新进路[J].清华法学,2014(4):169-176.
    [7] 张旭东.环境民事公私益诉讼并行审理的困境与出路[J].中国法学,2018(5):278-302.
    [8] 黄忠顺.论公益诉讼与私益诉讼的融合:兼论中国特色团体诉讼制度的构建[J].法学家,2015(1):19-31.
    [9] 张艳蕊.民事公益诉讼制度研究:兼论民事诉讼机能的扩大[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2007:134.
    [10] 盖晓慧.狭义环境损害的民事救济困境及制度救赎[J].河北法学,2019(4):145-160.
    [11] 王利明.新时代中国法治建设的基本问题[J].中国社会科学,2018(1):45-54.
    [12] 吴如巧,雷嘉,郭成.论环境民事公益诉讼与私益诉讼的共通性:以最高人民法院相关司法解释为视角的分析[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2019(5):167-178.
    [13] 彭中遥.论生态环境损害赔偿诉讼与环境公益诉讼之衔接[J/OL].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2021(3):169-180.
    [14] 黄福玲.论我国环境诉讼的司法保障:以传统民事诉讼制度为视角[J].广西社会科学,2011(10):77-80.
    [15] 胡建淼,邢益精.公共利益概念透析[J].法学,2004(10):3-8.
    [16] 陈新民.德国公法学基础理论[M].山东:山东人民出版社,2001:200.
    [17] 吕忠梅.论环境侵权的二元性[N].人民法院报,2014-10-29(008).
    [18] 夏文忠.检察监督职能的理论基础与发展态势[J].延边党校学报,2018(6):58-62.
    [19] 陈幅宽.论检察诉讼监督及其价值目标[J].法学,2012(2):155-159.
    引证文献
引用本文

蒋超,张丹.我国环境民事公私益诉讼的并行与融合[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2022,28(3):269-278. DOI:10.11835/j. issn.1008-5831. jg.2022.04.021

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:636
  • 下载次数: 1248
  • HTML阅读次数: 770
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 在线发布日期: 2022-07-04
文章二维码