生态环境公益诉讼起诉主体的多元性及序位安排——兼与李挚萍教授商榷

发布时间：2018-07-02 19:20

本文选题：环境公益诉讼 + 起诉主体　；参考：《广西社会科学》2013年07期

【摘要】：虽然我国新的《民事诉讼法》已经规定了公益诉讼的条款,但是该条款只笼统赋予了"法律规定的机关和有关组织"有起诉权。根据我国已有的环境公益诉讼案件处理的经验,并借鉴国外环境公益诉讼的先进立法,"法律规定的机关和有关组织"可以明确为检察机关,政府不宜作为起诉主体;有关组织可以明确为依法成立的环保组织;公民可以作为起诉主体。对于多元化的起诉主体,各起诉主体都具有自身的优劣性,环保组织相比检察机关、公民、政府更具有起诉的优越性,可以处于第一序位,检察机关处于第二序位,公民处于第三序位。立法机关应尽快完善起诉主体并出台相应的起诉程序,从而使环境公益诉讼真正有效地发挥其价值,为促进人与自然和谐发展、构建两型社会以及建设生态文明提供坚实的法律保障。
[Abstract]:Although the new Civil procedure Law of our country has stipulated the provision of public interest litigation, this clause only gives "the organs and related organizations stipulated by law" the right to sue in general. According to the experience of handling environmental public interest litigation cases in our country, and drawing lessons from the advanced legislation of foreign environmental public interest litigation, the "organs and related organizations stipulated by law" can be defined as procuratorial organs, and the government should not be the main body of prosecution; Relevant organizations may be clearly established as environmental protection organizations according to law; citizens may act as subject of prosecution. For a plurality of prosecution subjects, each prosecution subject has its own advantages and disadvantages. Environmental protection organizations have more advantages than procuratorial organs, citizens, and governments, and can be placed in the first order and procuratorial organs in the second order. Citizens are in the third order. The legislature should perfect the subject of prosecution and issue the corresponding prosecution procedure as soon as possible, so that the environmental public interest litigation can bring its value into full play, in order to promote the harmonious development of man and nature. The construction of two-type society and the construction of ecological civilization to provide a solid legal guarantee.
【作者单位】：湖南商务职业技术学院;
【基金】：教育部哲学社会科学重大课题攻关项目(12JZD037)
【分类号】：D925

【参考文献】