摘 要
期盼已久的新《环保法》终于于 2015 年 1 月 1 日正式生效了，新《环保法》被誉为史上最严环保法，该法首次对环境公益诉讼主体进行了明确界定，并就社会组织提起环境公益诉讼进行了明确的规定。但新《环保法》关于环境公益诉讼主体的规定仍有一定的局限性。
据数据统计显示：截至 2015 年底，全国仅 1000 余个社会组织具备起诉条件，在 2015 年全国仅 9 家社会组织提起了环境公益诉讼。我国社会组织尚处于发展的初级阶段，其参与环境公益诉讼在取证、专业鉴定、诉讼成本等方面存在着重重障碍，而新环保法严苛的限制条件势必会打击社会组织参与环境保护的积极性。
基于环境权理论、公共信托理论、私人检察总长理论以及公众参与环境保护制度，通过考察国内外相关研究和司法实践，笔者通过分析认为除社会组织外，我国环境公益诉讼主体应扩大到检察机关、环保行政部门、公民。诉讼主体的广泛性是国外环境公益诉讼最大的特点；在我国司法实践中，检察机关、环保行政机关、公民、环保组织等作为环境公益诉讼主体提起环境公益诉讼的案件也屡见不鲜。新《环保法》实施前仅新《民事诉讼法》第五十五条规定了一个模糊的环境公益诉讼主体范围：法律规定的机关和社会组织，这导致在司法实践中某些本应拥有环境公益诉讼资格的主体提起环境公益诉讼时被法院裁定主体不适格不予受理或驳回起诉。
本文以环境公益诉讼主体为切入点，通过新《环保法》对我国环境公益诉讼主体的规定与理论基础、司法实践分析得出诉讼主体范围过于狭窄的结论，进而研究国外与我国司法实践中提起环境公益诉讼的主体，进一步探讨检察机关、环保行政机关、公民、社会组织提起环境公益诉讼的合理性，并对各主体提起环境公益诉讼进行制度设计，以期能够为我国环境保护事业的发展做出些许贡献。
关键词：环境公益诉讼，诉讼主体，司法实践
ABSTRACT
The long-awaited new “environmental protection law” finally tookeffect on on January 1, 2015 . it is known as the strictest environmentalprotection law .The new law which clearly defined on the plaintiffqualification of environmental public interest litigation for the firsttime.But the new environmental protection law still has some limitationson the subject scope.However, according to statistics it showed: By theend of 2015, there was only over 1000 social organizations with theprosecution conditions and in 2015 there is only nine social organizationsfiled a public interest litigation environment. Our social organization isstill at the early stages of development, we have lots of difficulties inparticipation in environmental public interest litigation in forensics,professional appraisal, litigation costs and other aspects , and the stringentrestrictions of new environmental protection law will inevitably hit theenthusiasm of these society organizations participating in environmentalprotection.
Based on the theory of environmental rights,public trust theory,private attorney general doctrine and public participation inenvironmental protection system,I believe that except for the socialorganization, the subject of environmental public interest litigation shouldbe extended to prosecutors, the administrative department ofenvironmental protection, citizens after examining the domestic andforeign research and judicial practice. The universality of subject ofExtensive litigation is the biggest feature of foreign environmental publicinterest litigation; in our judicial practice, the cases of prosecutors,environmental administrative authorities, citizens, environmental groupsand other public interest litigation environment as the mainenvironmental public interest litigation filed are quite common. Beforethe new law being put effect,only the new “Civil Procedure Law of thePeople's Republic of China” Article 55 rulers a fuzz subject range forenvironmental public interest litigation : the departments and socialorganizations according to law, which leads to the subject which shouldhave qualified environmental public interest litigation disqualificationinadmissible or dismiss the action when environmental public interestlitigation filed judged by court.
In this essay, regarding the main environmental public interestlitigation as a cutting point, it conclude that the subject of litigation is toonarrow after the analysis of current legislation on the subject ofenvironmental public interest litigation with the theoretical basis.What ismore,we discuss the abroad and China's judicial practice in environmentalpublic interest litigation filed subject, further Discussion prosecution,environmental protection and the executive, civil society organizationsfiled public interest litigation in environmental rationality, and each of themain environmental public interest litigation filed institutional design,with a view to make some contribution for the development of China'senvironmental protection industry.
Keywords: environmental public interest litigation, the subject ofproceedings, judicial practice
目录
摘 要
Abstract
第一章 绪论
1.1 研究目的和意义
1.1.1 研究目的
1.1.2 研究意义
1.2 国内外研究综述
1.2.1 国外研究概况
1.2.2 国内研究概况
1.3 研究方法
1.3.1 文献资料法
1.3.2 调查法
1.3.3 逻辑分析法
1.4 研究创新点
第二章 环境公益诉讼主体的立法现状与范围扩大的理论基础
2.1 立法现状
2.2 理论基础
第三章 国外环境公益诉讼主体的考察
3.1 美国环境公益诉讼主体
3.2 英国环境公益诉讼主体
3.3 印度环境公益诉讼主体
3.4 德国环境公益诉讼主体
3.5 日本环境公益诉讼主体
3.6 法国环境公益诉讼主体
第四章 我国司法实践中的诉讼主体
4.1 检察机关提起环境公益诉讼
4.2 社会组织提起环境公益诉讼
4.3 环保行政部门直接提起环境公益诉讼
4.4 公民提起环境公益诉讼
第五章 环境公益诉讼主体资格范围扩大的合理性分析与制度设计
5.1 检察机关提起环境公益诉讼的合理性分析与制度设计
5.1.1 关于检察机关提起环境公益诉讼适格问题的争议
5.1.2 检察机关提起环境公益诉讼的法理基础
5.1.3 检察机关提起环境公益诉讼的优势
5.1.4 检察机关提起环境公益诉讼的制度设计
5.2 公民提起环境公益诉讼的合理性分析和制度设计
5.2.1 公民成为环境公益诉讼主体的效用与依据
5.2.2 公众参与与监督作用
5.2.3 公民提起环境公益诉讼的制度设计
5.3 环保行政部门提起环境公益诉讼制度的合理性分析及制度设计
5.3.1 关于环保行政部门提起环境公益诉讼适格问题的争议
5.3.2 环保行政部门提起环境公益诉讼的优势
5.3.3 设置前置程序防止怠于行政职责
5.4 探讨放宽社会组织提起环境公益诉讼的条件
结语
参考文献
致 谢
