环境行政公益诉讼的核心功能空间与制度塑造兼论《检察公益诉讼法(草案)》的完善

    The Core Functional Space and Institutional Shaping of Environmental Administrative Public Interest LitigationConcurrently on the Improvement of the “Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Law (Draft)”

    • 摘要: 环境行政公益诉讼虽具诉讼之名,实践却呈现“诉前程序主导、诉讼程序边缘”的运行样态。诉前程序因权力属性的行政化倾向、制度结构的非自足性以及价值功能的工具性特征,难以承载制度根基之责。环境行政公益诉讼的根基终究在于其诉讼程序。依诉讼的内在逻辑,其核心功能空间应定位于通过对实质争议的审理与裁判,为行政履职确立法律基准。当前环境行政公益诉讼在核心功能空间的构建上明显不足,主要表现为诉讼空间受限、案件实质争议缺失以及审判功能虚化。为实现该制度核心功能空间的塑造,应从立法层面构建系统化的制度保障机制:通过约束检察机关程序裁量权防范实质争议案件的不当消化;完善诉前协同机制实现非实质争议案件的有效分流;矫正法院裁判定位以保障司法裁判功能的本位回归。在《生态环境法典》已对环境行政公益诉讼做出原则规定的背景下,《检察公益诉讼法(草案)》应承担立法细化任务。

       

      Abstract: Although environmental administrative public interest litigation bears the name of litigation, its practice exhibits an operational pattern characterized by the “dominance of pre-litigation procedures and the marginalization of litigation procedures.” Due to its tendency towards administrativ formalization in terms of power attributes, the non-self-sufficient nature of its institutional structure, and the instrumental characteristics of its value function, the pre-litigation procedure struggles to bear the responsibility of serving as the institutional foundation. The true foundation of environmental administrative public interest litigation lies in its litigation procedures. Based on the inherent stipulations of litigation, its core functional space should be positioned in the adjudication and judgment of substantive disputes, establishing legal benchmarks for administrative performance through judicial decisions. Currently, the construction of this core functional space in environmental administrative public interest litigation is significantly inadequate, mainly manifested in the limited scope for litigation, the absence of substantive disputes in cases, and the ineffectiveness of the adjudicative function. To shape the core functional space of this system, a systematic institutional guarantee mechanism should be established at the legislative level: by restricting the procuratorial organs’ discretionary power in procedures to prevent the improper disposition of substantive dispute cases, improving the pre-litigation coordination mechanism to achieve effective diversion of non-substantive dispute cases, and reshaping the Court’s adjudicative positioning to safeguard the reorientation of judicial adjudication to its proper function.Given that the “Ecological and Environmental Code” has already provided principled provisions for environmental administrative public interest litigation, the “Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Law (Draft)” should undertake the task of detailed legislative specification.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回