Discussion of China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation System

This paper, through research on the status quo of China's environmental public interest litigation and seizing the opportunity that the Law of Civil Procedure has first clearly defined public interest litigation, focuses on analysis of present difficulties and institutional dilemma related to the environmental public interest litigation in China and involves some useful discussions of main subject scope, burden of proof, funds guarantee and stopping infringement before litigation etc.

Compensatory Damages in Personal Information Public Interest Litigation in China: Challenges and Prospects

In contrast to private interest litigation,public interest litigation provides a more potent solution to personal information infringements marked by extensive scope,unspecified victims,and limited individual loss.However,com⁃pensatory damages remain a contentious issue,both in theory and in practice,within the legal framework of personal in⁃formation public interest litigation.Through an empirical study conducted within China's judicial practice,this paper reveals that the pending issue concerning the nature and function of compensatory damages has caused highly contra⁃dictory verdicts regarding their calculation and allocation,as well as their relationship with other forms of pecuniary li⁃abilities.Only by acknowledging the role of compensatory damages imposed in personal information public interest liti⁃gation as"Skimming off Excess Profits",and affirming their function as deterrence rather than compensation can they truly achieve the broader objective of safeguarding personal information security and promoting public welfare,as well as avoid disrupting the harmony of the existing legal landscape.

On the Plaintiff's Subject Qualification for Environmental Public Interest Litigation Instituted by People's Procuratorates

Although it is not the main duty for the People's Procuratorate to institute environmental public interest litigation proceedings, the existence of "reserve" prosecution right of plaintiff not only is beneficial to timely prevention and cure of environmental damage, but also contributes indispensable judicial supervision force to the environmental legality construction. In order to safeguard environmental public interests, many local prosecutorial organizations have practiced environmental public interests litigation. Since Chinese law has not made explicit stipulation on the function of the People's Procuratorate instituting environmental public interest litigation, the plaintiff's subject qualification for environmental public interest litigation instituted by the People's Procuratorate is still in question. In order to propel the People's Procuratorate to completely and fully exercise their power of supervision and prosecution, there shall be corresponding legislation that provides powerful guarantee for the People's Procuratorate instituting environmental public interest litigation.

Research on Environmental Public Interest Litigation in Taiwan

As germination and rise of public environmental awareness in Taiwan, large-scale air pollution, water pollution, noise, land subsidence and other public hazards harming human health and living environment caused by various production or consumption activities are generated. Facing the situation of environment increasingly aggravates, environmental public interest litigation system is constructed. First, Article 9 of Administrative Procedure Law stipulates public interest litigation;then ,Article 34 of Environmental Basic Law cleady stipulates important elements of public interest litigation. In the research, taking the first environmental public interest litigation in Taiwan as the example, collusion process between government and developer, and private environmental protection groups finally obtaining victory through the continuous effort and litigation are illustrated, thereby uncovering so-called ＂legal＂ saying by government and developer. Environmental maintenance and improvement is the duty of every citizen should do, but not only the duty of govemment, which is mentality of environmental public interest litigation development should have and road must take.

Analysis on Ecological Personality Right--In the Perspective of Environmental Personality Right

This essay focuses on expanding the traditional theory of personality right and referring to the outside legislative cases in order to promote environmental information disclosure,the purpose,therefore is to realize the ecological personality right.

Selection and Optimization of Path Responding to Unexpected Environmental Incidents in China

By analyzing disposal status of unexpected environmental incidents by government,public and enterprise,and combining the characteristics of unexpected environmental incidents,specific measures of responding to unexpected environmental incidents are proposed from the aspects of perfecting guarantee system of emergency nomocracy,enhancing information disclosure,encouraging public participation,enhancing the construction of emergency response capability,and enhancing post-event management,to improve the ability of defending environmental risk.

On the Circumstance Administration Commonweal Lawsuit System

In China,establishing institution of environmental administrative public interest litigation is necessary and of great importance.It is not only necessary for supervising law-based administration of administrative subjects,but also for preserving the ecological environment well,as well as being integrated with the international community.The key to establish China’s institution of environmental administrative public interest litigation to broaden the scope of accepting cases,extend the plaintiff qualification,and establish the prepositive procedure institution inevitable for administrative reconsideration,the compulsory lawyer agency institution,as well as the successful plaintiff incentive institution,and so on.

On Governance of Celebrity Endorsements in False Advertising

incidents of extreme hyperbole and fraud in celebrity advertisements have occurred repeatedly because advertising participants are driven by commercial interests and it is also relevant to the deep social and cultural background. Therefore, great and prolonged efforts should be made to govern celebrity advertising in a multi-pronged way： strengthening legal supervision on the basis of clearly defined false advertising; establishing early warning and punishing systems including pre-qualification system, filing system and banning system; promoting public interest litigation system; increasing consumers＇ media literacy.

论个人信息保护民事公益诉讼起诉主体的范围与顺位

自个人信息保护民事公益诉讼在我国开展以来,理论界与实务界就对该类诉讼的起诉主体存在较大争议,分歧主要集中在范围界定与诉权顺位两个方面。《个人信息保护法》第70条虽然对该类诉讼的起诉主体作了规定,但主体范围不明以及诉权顺位不清的问题仍未得到彻底解决。要正确实施该制度,应否定“履行个人信息保护职责的部门”的起诉资格,扩张“法律规定的消费者组织”的范围,明确“由国家网信部门确定的组织”的条件,并以《民事诉讼法》第58条及不同类型民事公益诉讼之间的关系为依据,厘清不同起诉主体的诉权顺位。当受侵害对象为普通公民时,应尊重检察机关民事公益诉权的补充性,将“国家网信部门确定的组织”的起诉顺位置于检察机关之前;当受侵害对象为众多消费者时,应考虑到受侵害对象的特殊身份,依次由“法律规定的消费者组织”“由网信部门确定的组织”和检察机关行使起诉权。

论刑事附带民事公益诉讼诉前公告制度的废除

我国刑事附带民事公益诉讼中是否诉前公告争议很大。现行司法解释要求履行诉前公告程序,保障其他法律规定的机关和组织提起刑事附带民事公益诉讼的优位性,目的在于限制公权力介入私权领域,发挥其他机关和组织在民事公益诉讼上的专业优势,但是其未关注到我国其他机关和组织在公益诉讼中的现实弱势,不利于公共利益的保护。在司法实践中,诉前公告制度呈现“空置状态”,基本没有其他机关和组织在公告后介入诉讼,反而导致与刑事审查起诉期限之间的冲突,干扰刑事审判的正常进行,不利于保障诉讼效率,损害犯罪嫌疑人、被告人获得迅速审判的权利,应当废除刑事附带公益诉讼案件的诉前公告制度。

生成式人工智能个人信息安全挑战及敏捷治理

生成式人工智能秘密收集个人敏感数据,冲破“知情同意”原则和“最小必要”原则的限制,或将使信息关联违法高发。生成式人工智能信息收集行为主动、收集内容全面、泛化能力强劲,对“知情同意”原则和“最小必要”原则带来严重挑战。宏观层面,我国现有民事法律无力于数据安全治理,刑事法律缺乏明确的违法计量标准,由行政法规挑起数据法治大梁。微观层面,我国现有法律规范体系对被侵权人加以不合理的举证义务,司法救济路径单一,不利于权利救济。选择风险控制路径,从算法协议透明化、治理场景化和多方位协同化应对信息关联违法等方面展开制度构建,引入个人敏感数据单独监管制度和预防性公益诉讼制度破解该困局。

论风险预防原则在环境司法适用中的谦抑性

风险预防原则在当下环境法中的司法适用,游走在能动与谦抑之间,且呈现出过度能动倾向。“谦抑性”是对风险预防原则适用“分寸”之理论回应,其法理基础可从风险预防原则的规范基础、固有局限以及司法属性等层面予以诠释。风险预防原则在环境法中适用的谦抑性可被解构为“补充性”“有限性”“温和性”和“内敛性”四要素,由此推理出风险预防原则在环境司法中谦抑性适用的制度框架:在实体上,应促成风险预防原则在环境法典上的体现,只有在对照生态环境风险标准的前提下存在科学不确定性时,方能动用风险预防原则,其适用遵循整体温和的类型化理路。在程序上,诉讼推进阶段下的司法适用应严守职权探知界限,配置阶段化举证责任和类型化的诉前程序;案件裁判阶段下的司法适用不得超出认定事实范围,同时应对援引的风险预防原则附加适用理由。

劳动力老化如何影响劳动生产率?——基于中国城市面板数据的分析

中国自2000年步入老龄化社会以来,人口老龄化程度持续加深,作为社会经济基本要素,劳动力老化使得社会经济发展面临一系列新挑战与新机遇。为探索劳动力老化对劳动生产率的影响机理,基于2000—2020年中国城市面板数据,在借鉴既往研究的基础上,利用长差分模型实证分析劳动力老化对劳动生产率的影响。研究发现,劳动力老化与劳动生产率之间呈负相关关系;进一步从要素投入和技术进步两个方面考察劳动力老化对劳动生产率的作用机制后发现,劳动力老化主要通过影响技术进步与劳动就业作用于劳动生产率;此外,劳动技能提升、公共财政投入等公共政策可以有效降低劳动力老化对劳动生产率的消极影响;最后,本研究认为,若想有效应对这一问题就要加强对生育问题的关注,要从劳动技能提升、公共财政投入等方面制定专门且有效的公共政策,并在具体实施时,注重相关政策向中西部地区、二线及以下城市等特定地区倾斜。上述这些研究结论有助于从劳动力老化视角解释中国城市劳动生产率的表现差异,对于推动人口发展新格局下的经济高质量发展具有重要意义。

公益诉讼中检察谦抑性原则的理论与应用

检察公益诉讼的顺利开展关乎检察权作用时机、检察权与行政权以及和私人权利关系的互动问题。在公益诉讼的启动上,人民检察院应以检察谦抑性原则为基本要求和追求,避免权力行使突破边界,并与民间代表力量充分协调,呵护民间自治力量的发展。在检察权和行政权关系问题上,应当厘清两类公权力的核心差异,合理划分二者的作用范围和边界,避免权力发生混淆和重叠。在检察权和私人权益的关系中,应当秉承公权行使保障私人权益的理念,注重公共利益和私人利益的均衡,避免绝对追求公益实现,忽视私益保护的情况发生。

论检察公益诉讼中的调查核实权

依据宪法和法律的规定,人民检察院是我国的法律监督机关。检察机关提起公益诉讼保护社会公共利益、维护社会治理秩序是人民检察院行使法律监督职责的重要内容和途径。调查核实权是检察机关充分行使公益诉讼法律监督职能的必要手段,保障和服务公益诉讼的顺利开展。检察公益诉讼中的调查核实权作为一项基础权力,虽具有非强制性和有限性,但具有一定的刚性和权威性。为更好地贯彻二十大精神,推动习近平法治思想的检察实践,应对公益诉讼不断发展的现实需求,应积极配合公益诉讼立法,在立法中对“调查核实”这一检察公益诉讼的核心环节加强规范,对调查核实权的属性、权力边界和运用程序予以进一步明确和细化。

民事公益诉讼的功能分类和程序分野

民事公益诉讼入法的十余年间,司法实践的发展形态与立法者的设想并不完全一致。检察机关迅速在公益诉讼中处于一家独大的领导者角色,在起到积极作用的同时,也带来了一些可能的隐患。面向未来,应当区分民事公益诉讼的法律监督功能和纠纷解决功能,并根据两个功能配置不同的程序规定,在坚持检察机关主导诉前程序的同时,强化法院审判权在公益诉讼程序中的主导作用,以此实现从一家独大到双轮驱动的转变,更好地实现民事公益诉讼的价值和目的。

论湿地保护领域中的预防性环境行政公益诉讼

传统的湿地保护模式具有“行政执法人员的机会主义”“多元规制机构的协调难题”“持续性的运行成本支出”等相对劣势。为实现对于湿地生态的全过程保护,督促湿地行政主管部门积极履职,有必要将预防性环境行政公益诉讼纳入湿地保护体系。应通过立法或司法解释,明确预防性环境行政公益诉讼的提起范围、提出时机和诉讼程序。

公益诉讼惩罚性赔偿责任的体系定位

独立的制度空间是发挥独立价值的基础,公益诉讼惩罚性赔偿首先需要厘清的是其与刑事罚金、行政罚款的关系,讨论在刑事罚金和行政罚款之下还有无独立的制度空间。在功能上,三者具有同质性,均旨在惩罚遏制违法行为;在适用的案件范围上,食品公益诉讼惩罚性赔偿与食品犯罪趋同,并被行政处罚所包含;在金钱罚手段上,针对食品违法行为,《刑法》与《食品安全法》规定了足够的金钱罚手段,客观上无需公益诉讼惩罚性赔偿予以补足。因此,公益诉讼惩罚性赔偿并无大范围适用的必要。但公益诉讼惩罚性赔偿相对于刑事处罚与行政处罚具有自身的制度优势,其适用范围应据此确定,以形成相互区分又有机衔接的规制体系。

反垄断检察民事公益诉讼制度之具体构造

我国修正后的《反垄断法》规定了检察民事公益诉讼制度,但立法条文较为粗略,亟需完成制度的具体构造,尤其要科学合理地确定起诉条件、受案范围和诉请事项等核心内容。在起诉条件方面,重点要准确把握“损害社会公共利益”这项标准,要将是否排除或严重限制竞争作为关注重点,同时考察是否损害了非特定的众多消费者利益;在受案范围上,应仅覆盖垄断协议、滥用市场支配地位行为,经营者集中不宜作为可诉的行为类型;在诉请事项方面,应以停止侵害为主,不提出赔偿损失诉请。

论环境民事公益诉讼中因果关系要件的证明

当前,环境民事公益诉讼中因果关系要件的证明责任如何分配及其证明标准如何设定,对此理论界和实务界仍有很大争议。在证明责任分配问题上,解决路径在于参照适用《民法典》第一千二百三十条的规定,由被告承担环境民事公益诉讼中因果关系要件的客观证明责任。与此同时,原告需提供能够证明关联性事实的初步证据。这一规则应当理解为因果关系的法律推定。将因果关系法律推定规则引入环境民事公益诉讼中具有合理性基础,如纠正人们对环境侵权因果关系要件“证明责任倒置”的错误认识、防止原告滥用诉权、平衡原被告双方的举证负担。在证明标准问题上,环境民事公益诉讼中因果关系要件的证明标准应因事后救济性环境民事公益诉讼和预防性环境民事公益诉讼的类型划分而有所区别,且受关联性事实认定标准的影响。