【作者】 刘颖；

【导师】 陈冬；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法律硕士（法学）（专业学位）， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 随着环境问题日益复杂,仅靠个人或者环保组织来监督环境违法行为已经不能充分保护环境公益,因此需要借助行政机关的力量来解决破坏环境和生态资源的行为。环境问题大多具有复杂性、专业性特点。在解决环境问题方面行政机关发挥着其独特的优势。然而,在司法实践中我们发现,环境违法案件背后往往隐含着行政机关的违法作为或不作为,存在着行政机关监管失灵的问题,此时,环境行政公益诉讼应运而生。环境行政公益诉讼虽然是行政诉讼的一种,但是它又有其独特的一面,它是借助检察机关的力量,来解决环境违法案件背后行政机关监管失灵的问题。检察机关在行政公益诉讼实施以来对纠正行政机关违法行为和不作为方面发挥着巨大的作用。但是我们也发现检察机关在提起的环境行政公益诉讼案件中,总是乐于针对行政机关的不作为提起诉讼,因而检察机关提起的诉讼中不作为案件占有相当大的比重。不作为的认定已经成为环境行政公益诉讼的热点,然而,作为一个新的诉讼形式,相关法律法规并不完善。关于环境行政公益诉讼制度的规定也仅仅存在于《行政诉讼法》第25条及相关司法解释中,这种规定过于粗糙,对环境行政公益诉讼中行政不作为的司法认定也没有明确的规定。现有的研究成果对环境行政公益中行政不作为内涵的界定、作为义务范围、判断标准的选择等问题的关注与探讨严重不足。鉴于我国在制定法律制度时,总是有司法实践先于立法的特点,本文将以收集到的司法实践中案例为基础对不作为认定现状进行剖析,发现当前行政不作为认定的两层次认定路径,并根据所发现的当前裁判路径存在履行可能性判断的缺失、被告资格审查的缺失等问题,为进一步完善环境行政公益诉讼中行政不作为司法认定规则提出完善建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the increasing complexity of environmental issues,it is no longer sufficient to rely on individuals or environmental protection organizations to supervise environmental violations to fully protect environmental public welfare.Therefore,it is necessary to rely on the power of administrative agencies to solve the behaviors that damage the environment and ecological resources.Most environmental problems are complex and professional,and administrative agencies play their unique advantages in solving environmental problems.However,in judicial practice,we have found that environmental violation cases often imply illegal actions or omissions by administrative agencies.There is the problem of regulatory failure of administrative organs.At this time,environmental administrative public interest litigation arises at the historic moment.Although environmental administrative public interest litigation is a kind of administrative litigation,it has its unique side.It uses the power of the procuratorial organ to solve the problem of administrative organ supervision failure behind environmental violation cases.Since the implementation of administrative public interest litigation,procuratorial organs have played a huge role in correcting the illegal acts and omissions of administrative organs.However,we also found that in the environmental administrative public interest litigation cases filed by the procuratorial agency,they are always willing to file a lawsuit against the omission of the administrative agency,so the omission cases brought by the procuratorial agency account for a considerable proportion.The determination of omission has become a hot spot in environmental administrative public interest litigation.However,as a new form of litigation,many laws and regulations are not perfect,and the provisions on the environmental administrative public interest litigation system only exist in Article25 of the Administrative Litigation Law and related judicial interpretations.There are no clear regulations on the determination of acts in administrative public interest litigation.Existing research results have seriously insufficient attention and discussion on the definition of the connotation of omission,the scope of the obligation,and the choice of judgment standards.In view of the fact that when the legal system is formulated in my country,judicial practice always precedes legislation.This article Based on the collected cases in judicial practice,the status quo of omission determination will be analyzed,and the current two-level adjudication path for omission determination will be found,and based on the current adjudication path discovered,there is a lack of fulfillment possibility judgment and the qualification review of the defendant.Deficiency and other issues,to further improve the environmental administrative public interest litigation non-judgment rules to propose improvements.更多还原