数字化转型时期环境监测数据证据效力的司法认定——基于2015—2020年环境行政诉讼裁判文书的考察

Judicial Determination of Evidential Effectiveness of Environmental Monitoring Data in Digital Transformation Period:Based on Environmental Administrative Litigation Cases from 2015 to 2020

数字化转型时期环境监测具有主体多元化、工具和形式多样化的特点。在环境行政执法过程中,不同主体出具的污染源监测数据不一致的情况时有发生。规范层面预设监测数据审核作为证据资格取得条件或预设执法监测数据的证明力居优,不仅难以为《行政诉讼法》所兼容,还将影响企业主动承担监测义务的积极性。相关裁判文书样本亦表明,不同法院对这类证据的审查方式、审查强度及审查标准存在较大差异。应考虑制定裁判指引,建立从形式审查到全面审查、从证据资格审查到证明力大小审查的二阶审查模式,附条件地采纳“实质性证据标准”以确定合适的审查强度,并根据行政行为的不同种类适用多元化证明标准,以提高裁判的规范性及证据效力判断的可预见性,提升环境公共数据生产的质和量。

Environmental monitoring in digital transformation period has the characteristics of diversified subjects, tools and forms.The inconsistency between self-monitoring data of enterprises and monitoring data of the environmental authorities often occurs. It is not only difficult to be compatible with theAdministrative Procedure Law, but also will affect the initiative of enterprises to undertake self-monitoring obligations. The sample analysis of environmental administrative litigation judgments involving disputes over the effectiveness of environmental monitoring data or reports from 2015 to 2020 shows that different courts have great difference in methods, intensity and standards of review. Judicial authorities should formulate guidelines for the judicial review of monitoring data,based on the dual structure of evidence effectiveness, and establish a two-staged review mode from formal review to comprehensive review, from evidence qualification review to proving ability review. In order to promote the standardization of adjudication and to improve environmental quality and quantity of public data production, the " substantive evidence standard" should be conditionally adopted to determine the appropriate intensity of review, and the diversified proof standard be applied according to different types of administrative acts.