论文部分内容阅读
环境问题凸显,环境公益诉讼引起学界和实务界的共同关注。作为法律监督机关的检察机关屡屡出现在环境公益诉讼的原告席,引发了学界对检察机关提起公益诉讼原告资格的争论。依据尼尔·麦考密克关于二次证明的内容,从后果主义原则对检察机关提起环境公益诉讼进行考察,检察机关提起环境公益诉讼有利于环境公益之实现、公平正义之实现、与诉讼原告资格的发展相一致,并且从协调性原则来看,检察机关提环境公益诉讼与其法律监督地位和现行法律均无冲突。因此检察机关提起环境公益诉讼成为一项规则或法律依据应当有效。但现实中,检察机关提起环境公益诉讼还面临着诸如法律规定不明确、管辖权难以确定、权力配置不清、启动困难和标的分配难操作等困难,亟待解决。
Prominent environmental issues, environmental public interest litigation has attracted the attention of academics and practitioners. Procuratorial organs, as legal supervisory organs, often appear in plaintiff seats in environmental public interest litigation, triggering debates over eligibility of prosecutors to initiate public interest litigation. According to Neil McCormick’s content of the second proof, from the principle of consequences, the procuratorial organs to initiate environmental public interest litigation investigation, procuratorial organs to bring environmental public interest litigation is conducive to the realization of environmental charity, the realization of fairness and justice, and the plaintiffs In accordance with the principle of coordination, the procuratorate’s mention of environmental public interest litigation has no conflict with its legal supervision status and the current law. Therefore, procuratorial organs to bring environmental public interest litigation into a rule or legal basis should be effective. However, in reality, procuratorates filed environmental public interest litigation is still facing such as the legal provisions is not clear, the jurisdiction is difficult to determine, the power allocation is not clear, difficult to start and difficult to allocate the standard operation and other problems that require urgent solution.