食用野生动物法律责任类型化分析及公益救济路径研究

Classification Analysis of Legal Responsibility of Eating Wild Animals and Research on the Path of Public Interest Relief

在现有立法背景下,食用国家保护野生动物须承担行政法律责任乃至刑事法律责任,食用地方保护野生动物或“三有动物”,无法提供合法来源证明或检疫证明的,也会面临问责。文章从疫情受害者民事权益救济角度出发,认为野生动物食用者须承担民事责任。尽管食用野生动物导致疫情与环境侵权具有某种程度上的相似性,但二者之间存在多方面本质上的区别,不可作为环境侵权处理。如果野生动物食用者违法造成疾病传播,应向被传染者承担侵权责任,无论其食用的是何种野生动物。此外,食用珍贵、濒危的野生动物,造成生态损害后果的,还可能与猎杀者一起共同成为环境民事公益诉讼生态环境损害赔偿或诉讼的追诉对象。

According to the existing legislation,those who eat wildlife under special state protection must undertake administrative and even criminal responsibility.It is also the case with those who eat wildlife under special local protection or the species of terrestrial wildlife which are beneficial or of economic or scientific value if they cannot provide a legal source or quarantine certificate.From the perspective of relieving the civil rights of the victims of the epidemic,this article maintains that civil liability should be considered.Although there is certain similarity between the epidemic situation caused by the consumption of wild animals and environmental infringement,there are many essential differences.Therefore,such behavior cannot be treated as environmental infringement.However,if the wildlife consumers illegally cause the spread of the disease,they should be held liable for the infringement,no matter what kind of wildlife they eat.In addition,the consumption of precious and endangered wild animals that causes ecological damage may also result in environmental civil public interest litigation ecological environmental damage compensation negotiations or lawsuits.