“双碳”目标下应对气候变化司法规则的反思与优化——从消耗臭氧层物质案件切入

Reflection and optimization of judicial rules for climate change mitigation under the “dual carbon” goals: a case study of ozone-depleting substance consumption

“双碳”目标下,司法是应对气候变化的关键力量。在环境司法专门化改革背景下,最高人民法院制定的《环境资源案件类型与统计规范(试行)》预期规范环境案件类型,统一环境司法标准,其将气候变化应对案件列为五大环境资源案件类型之一,拟为推进“双碳”目标提供裁判规则指引。保护臭氧层是减缓与应对气候变化的重要举措,优化消耗臭氧层物质纠纷司法解决是司法契合“双碳”目标机制创新的重点。以消耗臭氧层物质案件的司法判决为重点个案,多维度检视,可归纳司法样态的现存困境:核心概念内涵界定不清、案件类型化欠缺周延性、责任认定未形成统一规律。建议从明晰类案概念体系以加强类型化建构、实质归纳类案的本质特征及其受案范围、实现刑事责任认定的类型化转向三方面,完善气候变化应对类案件的类案司法规则。

Under the dual carbon goals, the judiciary plays a crucial role in addressing climate change. Against the background of the specialization of environmental judicial cases, the Supreme People’s Court has enacted “Provisions on Environmental Resource Case Types and Statistics Standards (Trial),” aiming to regulate environmental case types and unify environmental judicial standards. The Provisions categorizes climate change mitigation cases as one of the five major environmental resource case types, intending to provide judicial rules and guidance for advancing the dual carbon goals. Protecting the ozone layer is an important measure to mitigate and address climate change. Optimizing the judicial resolution of disputes related to ozone-depleting substances is a key area for judicial innovation that aligns with the dual carbon goals. Focusing on judicial rulings in cases of this type, a multi-dimensional review reveals the challenges in the judicial paradigm: unclear definition of core legal concepts, inadequate typification of case types and lack of uniformity in liability determination. Three suggestions are made to improve the judicial rules in this regard, namely, enhancing typification by clarifying the conceptual system of similar cases, summarizing the essential characteristics and scope of relevant cases, and transitioning towards typified criminal liability determination.