生态环境损害赔偿磋商的性质辨识与制度塑造
|
摘要
生态环境损害赔偿磋商制度以平等、协商为理念,通过政府实体与责任方的交往对话,促进损害评估量化及修复方案的达成。目前我国生态环境损害赔偿磋商制度在政府索赔依据、赔偿磋商性质、赔偿磋商程序规则等方面均无明确的规范指引。建议以环境权(环境利益)理论作为政府索赔依据和理论基础,以避免自然资源国家所有权理论带来的诸多漏洞和矛盾;在"制度目的—性质界定"的逻辑思路下,损害赔偿磋商行为界定为民事行为更为妥当;同时应对合作评估、权利处分、赔偿协议司法确认与执行监督等规则进行完善,以此确保生态环境损害赔偿磋商成果的有效转化。
The consultation system of ecological environment damage compensation is based on the concept of equality and consultation,through the communication and dialogue between the government entity and the responsible party to achieve quantitative assessment of damage facts and restoration objectives and restoration plans.However,at present,the consultation system of ecological environment damage in our country has no clear legal rules in the aspects of government claim theory,nature of compensation negotiation,rules of procedure of compensation negotiation,etc.Therefore,it is suggested that the theory of environmental rights(environmental interests) should be taken as the theoretical basis of government claims in order to avoid many loopholes and contradictions brought about by the theory of national ownership of natural resources;Under the logical thinking of " institutional purpose——nature definition ",it is more appropriate to define the negotiation act of compensation for damages as a civil act.At the same time,attention should be paid to the refinement of the rules of cooperative evaluation,the rules of disposition of rights,and the rules of judicial confirmation and enforcement of the compensation agreement,so as to ensure the effective transformation of the results of the consultation on compensation for ecological environment damage.
The consultation system of ecological environment damage compensation is based on the concept of equality and consultation,through the communication and dialogue between the government entity and the responsible party to achieve quantitative assessment of damage facts and restoration objectives and restoration plans.However,at present,the consultation system of ecological environment damage in our country has no clear legal rules in the aspects of government claim theory,nature of compensation negotiation,rules of procedure of compensation negotiation,etc.Therefore,it is suggested that the theory of environmental rights(environmental interests) should be taken as the theoretical basis of government claims in order to avoid many loopholes and contradictions brought about by the theory of national ownership of natural resources;Under the logical thinking of " institutional purpose——nature definition ",it is more appropriate to define the negotiation act of compensation for damages as a civil act.At the same time,attention should be paid to the refinement of the rules of cooperative evaluation,the rules of disposition of rights,and the rules of judicial confirmation and enforcement of the compensation agreement,so as to ensure the effective transformation of the results of the consultation on compensation for ecological environment damage.
引文
[1] 刘练军.自然资源国家所有的制度性保障功能[J].中国法学,2016(6).
[2] 郭海蓝,陈德敏.省级政府提起生态环境损害赔偿诉讼的制度困境与规范路径[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018(3).
[3] 吴家如.职权义务论[J].现代法学,1991(3).
[4] 陈真亮.环境保护的国家义务研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2015.
[5] 刘倩.生态环境损害赔偿:概念界定、理论基础与制度框架[J].中国环境管理,2017(1).
[6] 王金南,等.加快建立生态环境损害赔偿制度体系[J].环境保护,2016(2).
[7] 黄萍.生态环境损害索赔主体适格性及其实现——以自然资源国家所有权为理论基础[J].社会科学辑刊,2018(3).
[8] 刘巧儿.生态环境损害赔偿磋商的理论基础与法律地位[J].鄱阳湖学刊,2018(1).
[9] 程雨燕.生态环境损害赔偿磋商制度构想[J].北方法学,2017(5).
[10]郭海蓝,陈德敏.生态环境损害赔偿磋商的法律性质思辨及展开[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2018(4).
[11]张梓太,李晨光.生态环境损害政府索赔的路径选择[J].社会科学辑刊,2018(3).
[12]高吉喜,韩永伟.关于《生态环境损害赔偿制度改革试点方案》的思考与建议[J].环境保护,2016(2).
[13]黄锡生,韩英夫.生态损害赔偿磋商制度的解释论分析[J].政法论丛,2017(1).
[14]何军,等.论生态环境损害政府索赔机制的构建[J].环境保护,2018(5).
[15]王太高.公共利益范畴研究[J].南京社会科学,2005(7).
[16] [德]冯·巴尔.欧洲比较侵权行为法(下卷)[M].张新宝,等,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2010.
[17]Bradshaw,K.Settling for natural resource damages[J].Harv.Envtl.Law Rev.,2016(2).
[18]竺效.生态损害公益索赔主体机制的构建[J].法学,2016(3).
[19]Ackerman,F.,L.Heinzerling.Pricing the priceless:Cost-benefit analysis of environmental protection[J].U.Pa.Law Rev.,2002(5).
[20]Cruden,J.C.,M.R.Oakes.The past,present,and future of natural resource damages claims[J].Geo.Envtl.Law Rev.,2016(2).
[21]Tolan,P.E.Jr.Natural resource damages under CERCLA:Failures,lessons learned,and alternatives[J].N.M.Law Rev.,2008(2).
[22]汪劲.论生态环境损害赔偿诉讼与关联诉讼衔接规则的建立——以德司达公司案和生态环境损害赔偿相关判例为鉴[J].环境保护,2018(5).
[23]张辉.美国环境法研究[M].北京:中国民主法制出版社,2015.
[24]牛静,等.美国超级基金5年回顾政策对我国污染场地风险管理的启示[J].中国环境管理,2015(2).
(1)参见吕忠梅:《生态环境损害赔偿诉讼中的问题与对策》,载2018年“创新环境资源司法理论加强生态文明建设司法保障研讨会”主旨发言记录。
(2)新华社:《破解“企业污染、政府买单”困局——环保部有关负责人解读〈生态环境损害赔偿制度改革试点方案〉》,http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2015-12/03/content_5019632.htm,最后访问时间:2019年6月7日。
(3)参见 15 C.F.R.§ 990.14(c) (Under OPA,“Trustees must invite the responsible parties to participate in the natural resource damage assessment”);40 C.F.R.§ 300.615 (2015);43 C.F.R.§ 11.32(a)(2)(iii)(A) (authorizing cooperative assessments in the CERCLA context)。
(4)参见《贵州省生态环境损害赔偿磋商办法(试行)》(2017)第11条、《江苏省生态环境损害赔偿磋商办法(试行)》(2018)第5条。
(5)42 U.S.C.§9622。
(6)(2017)黔法0181民特6号;(2017)浙06刑终312号;(2019)渝01刑终78号。
(7)参见《湖南省生态环境损害赔偿磋商管理办法(试行)》(2017)、《贵州省生态环境损害赔偿磋商办法(试行)》(2017)、《晋江市生态环境损害赔偿磋商管理规定(试行)》(2018)、《江苏省生态环境损害赔偿信息公开办法(试行)》(2018)等。
(8)42 U.S.C.§9622。
[2] 郭海蓝,陈德敏.省级政府提起生态环境损害赔偿诉讼的制度困境与规范路径[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018(3).
[3] 吴家如.职权义务论[J].现代法学,1991(3).
[4] 陈真亮.环境保护的国家义务研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2015.
[5] 刘倩.生态环境损害赔偿:概念界定、理论基础与制度框架[J].中国环境管理,2017(1).
[6] 王金南,等.加快建立生态环境损害赔偿制度体系[J].环境保护,2016(2).
[7] 黄萍.生态环境损害索赔主体适格性及其实现——以自然资源国家所有权为理论基础[J].社会科学辑刊,2018(3).
[8] 刘巧儿.生态环境损害赔偿磋商的理论基础与法律地位[J].鄱阳湖学刊,2018(1).
[9] 程雨燕.生态环境损害赔偿磋商制度构想[J].北方法学,2017(5).
[10]郭海蓝,陈德敏.生态环境损害赔偿磋商的法律性质思辨及展开[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2018(4).
[11]张梓太,李晨光.生态环境损害政府索赔的路径选择[J].社会科学辑刊,2018(3).
[12]高吉喜,韩永伟.关于《生态环境损害赔偿制度改革试点方案》的思考与建议[J].环境保护,2016(2).
[13]黄锡生,韩英夫.生态损害赔偿磋商制度的解释论分析[J].政法论丛,2017(1).
[14]何军,等.论生态环境损害政府索赔机制的构建[J].环境保护,2018(5).
[15]王太高.公共利益范畴研究[J].南京社会科学,2005(7).
[16] [德]冯·巴尔.欧洲比较侵权行为法(下卷)[M].张新宝,等,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2010.
[17]Bradshaw,K.Settling for natural resource damages[J].Harv.Envtl.Law Rev.,2016(2).
[18]竺效.生态损害公益索赔主体机制的构建[J].法学,2016(3).
[19]Ackerman,F.,L.Heinzerling.Pricing the priceless:Cost-benefit analysis of environmental protection[J].U.Pa.Law Rev.,2002(5).
[20]Cruden,J.C.,M.R.Oakes.The past,present,and future of natural resource damages claims[J].Geo.Envtl.Law Rev.,2016(2).
[21]Tolan,P.E.Jr.Natural resource damages under CERCLA:Failures,lessons learned,and alternatives[J].N.M.Law Rev.,2008(2).
[22]汪劲.论生态环境损害赔偿诉讼与关联诉讼衔接规则的建立——以德司达公司案和生态环境损害赔偿相关判例为鉴[J].环境保护,2018(5).
[23]张辉.美国环境法研究[M].北京:中国民主法制出版社,2015.
[24]牛静,等.美国超级基金5年回顾政策对我国污染场地风险管理的启示[J].中国环境管理,2015(2).
(1)参见吕忠梅:《生态环境损害赔偿诉讼中的问题与对策》,载2018年“创新环境资源司法理论加强生态文明建设司法保障研讨会”主旨发言记录。
(2)新华社:《破解“企业污染、政府买单”困局——环保部有关负责人解读〈生态环境损害赔偿制度改革试点方案〉》,http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2015-12/03/content_5019632.htm,最后访问时间:2019年6月7日。
(3)参见 15 C.F.R.§ 990.14(c) (Under OPA,“Trustees must invite the responsible parties to participate in the natural resource damage assessment”);40 C.F.R.§ 300.615 (2015);43 C.F.R.§ 11.32(a)(2)(iii)(A) (authorizing cooperative assessments in the CERCLA context)。
(4)参见《贵州省生态环境损害赔偿磋商办法(试行)》(2017)第11条、《江苏省生态环境损害赔偿磋商办法(试行)》(2018)第5条。
(5)42 U.S.C.§9622。
(6)(2017)黔法0181民特6号;(2017)浙06刑终312号;(2019)渝01刑终78号。
(7)参见《湖南省生态环境损害赔偿磋商管理办法(试行)》(2017)、《贵州省生态环境损害赔偿磋商办法(试行)》(2017)、《晋江市生态环境损害赔偿磋商管理规定(试行)》(2018)、《江苏省生态环境损害赔偿信息公开办法(试行)》(2018)等。
(8)42 U.S.C.§9622。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |