中国环境民事公益诉讼的七个基本问题——从“某市环保联合会诉某化工公司环境污染案”说开去

发布时间：2018-03-08 09:19

本文选题：环境公益诉讼　切入点：原告适格性　出处：《政法论丛》2017年02期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】："某市环保联合会诉某化工公司等环境污染"一案揭示了中国环境民事公益诉讼向制度化迈进的取向。但该案在法院角色、原告资格、检察机关定位、因果关系推定以及赔偿款计算和履行等问题上亦引发诸多拷问。首先,法院在该案中过于积极和能动,是否有错位之嫌?其次,该案原告资格认定依据与适格原告的一般构成要件不相符,是否有牵强之嫌?其三,环保机关的支持配合,是否有渎职之嫌?其四,检察机关的角色定位缺乏法律根据,是否有越权之虞?其五,因果关系推定欠缺足够法理支撑,是否有擅断之嫌?其六,损害赔偿计算标准缺乏实定法上的依据,是否有违法之嫌?其七,"天价赔偿"如何使用?凡此七大问题,既是对该案之拷问,也是中国环境民事公益诉讼走向制度化所必须诘难。
[Abstract]:The case of Environmental Protection Federation of a certain City v. Environmental pollution of a Chemical Company reveals the orientation of China's environmental civil public interest litigation toward institutionalization. But the role of the case in the court, the qualification of the plaintiff, and the position of the procuratorial organ, The presumption of causality and the calculation and performance of compensation also lead to a lot of torture. First of all, the court is too active and active in this case, is there a suspicion of misplacement? Secondly, the qualification of the plaintiff in this case is not consistent with the general elements of the qualified plaintiff, is it far-fetched? Third, is there any suspicion of malfeasance with the support of environmental protection agencies? Fourth, the role of the procuratorial organs lack of legal basis, whether there is a risk of ultra vires? Fifth, the presumption of causality lacks sufficient legal support, is there a suspicion of arbitrariness? Sixthly, the standard of calculating damage compensation lacks the basis of the actual law, is there any suspicion of violating the law? Seven of them, "sky-high compensation" how to use? These seven problems are not only the torture of the case, but also the necessity of the Chinese environmental civil public interest litigation to be institutionalized.
【作者单位】：武汉大学法学院;
【分类号】：D925.1;D922.68

【相似文献】