论文部分内容阅读
近年,在我国司法实践中,人民检察院积极探索以自己的名义提起环境公益诉讼。然而,由于缺乏明确的法律规定,人民检察院提起环境公益诉讼迫切需要得到学理支持。“能动司法”为解决这一难题提供了理论支持。人民检察院提起环境公益诉讼具有形式正当性和实质正当性。人民检察院职能的合理扩张,是应对人民检察院业务发展与现行立法相对滞后之间矛盾的要求,也是其以公权力保障人权和程序公正的社会需要。一方面,人民检察院应秉持“能动司法”理念,作为代表国家提起环境公益诉讼的适格主体提起环境公益诉讼,这是其履行法定职能的应有之义。另一方面,公民、环保组织、行政机关的局限性也要求人民检察院提起环境公益诉讼。人民检察院提起环境公益诉讼应获得立法保障。我国立法应明确规定人民检察院提起环境公益诉讼的职能、受案范围和案件管辖、法律程序、举证责任、诉讼费用承担和诉讼时效。
In recent years, in our judicial practice, the People’s Procuratorate has actively explored and brought environmental public interest lawsuits in its own name. However, due to the lack of clear legal provisions, people’s procuratorates filed for environmental public interest litigation urgently needed academic support. “Active Justice” provides theoretical support for solving this difficult problem. People’s Procuratorate filed environmental public interest litigation has the form of legitimacy and substantive legitimacy. The reasonable expansion of the functions of the people’s procuratorate is a requirement to cope with the contradiction between the development of the people’s procuratorate’s service and the relative backwardness of the current legislation and the social need of safeguarding human rights and procedural fairness with public power. On the one hand, the People’s Procuratorate should uphold the concept of “active judicial” and bring environmental public interest litigation as a proper subject for bringing environmental public interest litigation on behalf of the state, which is its proper function of performing its statutory functions. On the other hand, the limitations of citizens, environmental protection organizations and administrative organs also require that people’s procuratorates bring environmental public interest litigation. People’s Procuratorate filed environmental public interest litigation should be protected by legislation. Our legislation should clearly stipulate that the People’s Procuratorate should take the function of filing environmental public interest litigation, the scope of accepting the case, the jurisdiction of the case, the legal procedure, the burden of proof, the litigation cost and the limitation of action.