污染环境罪主观要件的规范解释论——兼评《中华人民共和国刑法修正案(十一)》的亮点与不足

Normative Interpretation of Subjective Elements of Environmental Pollution Crime:Comment on the Advantages and Disadvantages of The People’s Republic of China Criminal Law Amendment(11)

污染环境罪是以故意污染环境造成环境事故为担责基础,还是过失造成污染环境事故也应担责,在学界有较大争议,实践裁判结果也各有不同。严格责任说符合罪行法定及适应罪责刑相适应原则,具有较大的环境司法实践价值。其具体规则在实体上应考察行为人是否实施了“排放、倾倒和处置”污染物的行为,以及行为是否造成了“严重污染环境”的结果及因果关系;在程序上应规定反证规则,允许行为人在基本案件事实与因果关系上反证以实现出罪的可能。

Whether the crime of environmental pollution should be carried on the basis of intentionally polluting the environment and causing environmental accidents or should be carried on the basis of negligently polluting the environment is controversial in the academic circle, and the judgment results in practice are also different. The theory of strict liability accords with the purpose of the crime and the principle of adapting the crime to the punishment, and has great value in environmental justice practice. On the one hand, its specific rules include the entity should examine whether the actor has implemented the “discharge, dumping and disposal” of pollutants, and whether the behavior has resulted in “serious pollution of the environment” and the causal relationship. On the other hand, the rule of counter proof should be stipulated in procedure, which allows the doer to counter prove the basic facts and causality in order to realize the possibility of crime.