[1]余 彦,黄金梓.对检察机关垄断行政公益诉讼起诉资格之质疑及正位——以环境行政公益诉讼为分析重点[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2018,19(01):12-19.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.01.002]
　Yu Yan,Huang Jinzi.Questions and Repositioning of Procuratorial Organ’s Monopoly of Administrative Public Interest Litigation Standing—Focus on Environmental Administrative Public Interest Litigation[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2018,19(01):12-19.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.01.002]
点击复制

对检察机关垄断行政公益诉讼起诉资格之质疑及正位——以环境行政公益诉讼为分析重点()
分享到：

常州大学学报(社会科学版)[ISSN:2095-042X/CN:32-1821/C]

卷:
第19卷
期数:
2018年01期
页码:
12-19
栏目:
法学研究
出版日期:
2018-02-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Questions and Repositioning of Procuratorial Organ’s Monopoly of Administrative Public Interest Litigation Standing—Focus on Environmental Administrative Public Interest Litigation
作者:
余 彦; 黄金梓
Author(s):
Yu Yan;  Huang Jinzi
关键词:
检察机关;  行政公益诉讼;  法律监督机关;  私人检察总长;  起诉主体序位
Keywords:
procuratorial organ;  administrative public interest litigation;  legal supervision organ;  private chief procurator;  prosecution subject order
分类号:
D922.68; D925.3
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.01.002
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
2017年6月27日修正后的《行政诉讼法》第25条第4款之合理性有待商榷,原因在于该款规定使得检察机关垄断了包括环境行政公益诉讼在内的行政公益诉讼起诉资格。检察机关作为法律监督机关和公益诉讼人的角色混同,在造成检察机关适用诉讼程序困难的同时,影响法院的正常审判和环境行政效率。检察机关环境公益起诉权作为公权力的一种具体表现形式,存在与其他适格原告相互配合并接受监督的客观需要。私人检察总长理论为公民个人以及社会组织作为适格原告提供了理论支援,解决了重构环境行政公益诉讼多元起诉主体制度的前提性问题。通过起诉主体序位制度的构建,可以最大程度地保障最优起诉主体的寻找和诉讼效率,进而实现环境行政公益诉讼“动力”条款效能的最大化。
Abstract:
Article 25, Clause 4 of the Administrative Procedural Law amended on June 27th, 2017 is open to question for it allows the procuratorial organ’s monopoly of administrative public interest litigation standing, including the environmental administrative public interest litigation. The role confusion of legal supervision and public interest litigation makes it difficult for the procuratorial organ to apply litigation procedure and influence the impartial judgment of the court as well as the efficiency of the environmental administration. As a form of public power, it is necessary for the environmental public interest litigation right of the procuratorial organ to cooperate with other qualified plaintiffs and accept supervision. The theory of private chief procurator provides the theoretical basis for individuals and social organizations to be qualified plaintiffs and prerequisite for the reconstruction of the multi-subject prosecution system of the environmental administrative public interest litigation. Through the construction of prosecution subject order system, it guarantees the location of the most appropriate plaintiff and the litigation efficiency to the extreme so as to achieve the maximum efficiency of the “drive” clause of the environmental administrative public interest litigation.

参考文献/References:

[1]柯坚,吴隽雅.检察机关环境公益诉讼原告资格探析——以诉权分析为视角[J].吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2016,37(6):74-80.
[2]秦前红.检察机关参与行政公益诉讼理论与实践的若干问题探讨[J].政治与法律, 2016(11):83-92.
[3]周义程.从分权制衡到社会制约:西方权力制约思想的范式转换[J].社会主义研究, 2011(4):82-87.
[4]维尔.宪政与分权[M].苏力,译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1997:74.
[5]张辉.美国公民诉讼之“私人检察总长理论”解析[J].环球法律评论,2014(1):164-175.
[6]田中英夫,竹内昭夫.私人在法实现中的作用[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[7]王名扬.美国行政法:上册[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2005:622.
[8]RUBENSTEIN B W. On what a “Private Attorney General” is and why it matters[J].Vanderbilt law review,2004, 57(32): 2130-2135.
[9]徐祥民,凌欣,陈阳.环境公益诉讼的理论基础探究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2010,20(1):149-155.
[10]李挚萍.中国环境公益诉讼原告主体的优劣分析和顺序选择[J].河北法学,2010,28(1):21-25.
[11]黄亚宇.生态环境公益诉讼起诉主体的多元性及序位安排——兼与李挚萍教授商榷[J].广西社会科学,2013(7):101-106.
[12]杨朝霞.论环境公益诉讼的权利基础和起诉顺位——兼谈自然资源物权和环境权的理论要点[J].法学论坛,2013,28(3):102-112.
[13]颜运秋,杨志华.环境公益诉讼两造结构模式研究[J].江西社会科学,2017(2):167-175.
[14]张锋.环境公益诉讼起诉主体的顺位设计刍议[J].法学论坛,2017,32(2):136-142.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介:余彦,法学博士,广东外语外贸大学、广州市绿色经济与环境能源法研究中心研究人员; 黄金梓,湖南农业大学公共管理与法学学院博士研究生,湖南生物机电职业技术学院思想政治理论课部讲师。
基金项目:教育部哲学社会科学重大课题攻关项目“生态环境保护的公益诉讼机制研究”(12JZD037); 国家社会科学基金重点项目“中国特色环境公益诉讼理论与制度研究”(14AFX023)。
更新日期/Last Update: 2018-02-20