论文部分内容阅读
科学依据已经成为现代政府规制活动的基础。同行评审在规制活动中的引入,能有效确保科学依据的可靠性,增强规制活动的透明度和可应责性。但同行评审并不能终结科学争议,相反却可能为规制对象提供弹药,引发更激烈的科学争议。法院不可避免成为规制科学争议的新阵地。作为通才型的法院,在面临日益精细的规制专业判断时,不应放弃作为看门人和守护者的司法责任。从传统的高度尊重到如今的严格审查,这种司法立场在确保科学依据可靠性的同时,也有助于增进规制活动的透明、审议、参与、问责等行政法价值。
Scientific basis has become the basis for the regulation of modern government. The introduction of peer review in regulatory activities can effectively ensure the reliability of scientific evidence and enhance the transparency and accountability of regulatory activities. However, peer review does not end scientific controversy, but on the contrary it may provide ammunition for the object of regulation and trigger more intense scientific controversy. Courts inevitably become a new front for regulating scientific disputes. As a generalist court, judicial decisions as gatekeepers and guardians should not be waived in the face of increasingly sophisticated professional judgments. From the traditional high respect to the strict review nowadays, this kind of judicial stance can help to enhance the value of administrative law such as transparency, deliberation, participation and accountability as well as the reliability of scientific evidence.