论文部分内容阅读
对于过去五十年来的全球暖化现象,人类活动要负90%的责任已成为基本事实。面对气候变化这一新型环境问题,气候变化诉讼已成为环境法上日益受人关注的环境司法应对方式。澳大利亚气候变化环境影响评价司法审查案(Gray v.The Minister for Planning and Ors)为我国应对气候变化这一新型环境问题提供了可借鉴的途径,即由相关公民或组织提起对建设项目环境影响评价的行政诉讼,从而启动对气候变化有关的环境影响评价具体行政行为的司法审查。文章从我国环境法的环境民主原则,风险预防原则和气候变化诉讼的作用提出我国气候变化环境影响评价诉讼的必要性。同时以《中华人民共和国环境影响评价法》(以下简称《环境影响评价法》)为气候变化议题司法切入的实体法律依据,以《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》(以下简称《行政诉讼法》)为气候变化议题司法切入的程序法律依据展开论述。
For the past five decades of global warming, it has become a basic fact that 90% of human activity is responsible. In the face of the new environmental issue of climate change, litigation on climate change has become an environmental judicial response to the growing concern of environmental law. Australia’s climate change assessment of environmental justice (Gray v. Minister for Planning and Ors) for China’s response to climate change a new type of environmental issues can provide avenues for reference by the relevant citizens or organizations on the construction project environmental impact assessment Of the administrative proceedings, thus initiating climate change-related environmental impact assessment of specific administrative actions of the judicial review. The article puts forward the necessity of litigation of environmental impact assessment of climate change in our country from the environmental democratic principle, risk prevention principle and climate change litigation action of environmental law in our country. At the same time, “People’s Republic of China Environmental Impact Assessment Law” (hereinafter referred to as “Environmental Impact Assessment Law”) as the substantive legal basis for judicatory access to climate change issues, “Administrative Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as “Administrative Procedure Law” Discuss the legal basis for the procedure of judicatory entry into climate change.