本文選題：民事公益訴訟　切入點(diǎn)：適格原告　出處：《上海外國語大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：近年來,新實(shí)施的《民事訴訟法》中規(guī)定的民事公益訴訟制度引起社會各界的廣泛熱議,學(xué)者對公益訴訟也進(jìn)行了相應(yīng)的探討。經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展和社會的變革帶來了一系列的社會問題,環(huán)境污染和消費(fèi)者權(quán)益受到侵害的案件也層出不窮。由于我國的民事公益訴訟起步晚加上發(fā)展也不成熟,上述問題仍缺乏足夠明確具體的法律規(guī)定予以解決。2012年寫入《民事訴訟法》的有關(guān)民事公益訴訟的制度性規(guī)定仍然不足以解決實(shí)踐中的問題。司法的中立性致使除非有主體啟動訴訟,否則法院不會主動審理任何一件案件。原告是訴訟的首要問題,賦予適格主體公益訴權(quán),是公益訴訟能夠高效公正開展的重要前提。因此本文選取公益訴訟制度中亟待厘清的問題——民事公益訴訟原告資格進(jìn)行論述。筆者基本觀點(diǎn)是:我國民事公益訴訟的原告體系應(yīng)當(dāng)由檢察機(jī)關(guān)、合格的社會團(tuán)體及個人組成,不包括行政機(jī)關(guān)。圍繞這一觀點(diǎn),本文主要分為兩個部分,共五章:第一部分即第一章:民事公益訴訟原告綜述。該部分首先介紹了不同領(lǐng)域的學(xué)者對公共利益的定義,接著在此基礎(chǔ)上簡要闡述了民事公益訴訟原告資格的內(nèi)涵。繼而分析有關(guān)民事公益訴訟的不同理論,肯定了程序當(dāng)事人理論和訴的利益理論作為民事公益訴訟的理論基礎(chǔ),在理論上驗(yàn)證了民事公益訴訟的合理性。第二部分從第二章到第五章,分別以專章的形式討論了公益訴訟的熱門主體——行政機(jī)關(guān)、檢察機(jī)關(guān)、社會團(tuán)體和公民個人。這四章的體例基本相同,都引用我國的著名案例,以期達(dá)到生動形象的效果。每一章的內(nèi)容大體包括概述、各主體的在國內(nèi)的立法和訴訟實(shí)踐、比較法的視角下部分其他國家和地區(qū)的法律制度,以及其作為公益訴訟適格原告的可行性。不過針對這四類主體的特點(diǎn),關(guān)注的重點(diǎn)也略有區(qū)別,行政機(jī)關(guān)側(cè)重分析其不應(yīng)成為公益訴訟原告的理由,檢察機(jī)關(guān)部分注重對現(xiàn)狀和問題的總結(jié),社會團(tuán)體主要關(guān)注對現(xiàn)有的法律規(guī)定的分析和完善,而公民個人更多的是探索賦予其民事公益訴訟訴權(quán)的可能性。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the civil public interest litigation system stipulated in the newly implemented "Civil procedure Law" has aroused widespread discussion from all walks of life in the society, and scholars have also carried on the corresponding discussion to the public interest litigation.Economic development and social change have brought a series of social problems, environmental pollution and consumer rights and interests have been infringed in endlessly.Due to the late start and immature development of civil public interest litigation in China,There is still a lack of specific legal provisions to solve the above problems. The institutional provisions on civil public interest litigation written into the Civil procedure Law in 2012 are still insufficient to solve the problems in practice.The neutrality of the judiciary prevents the court from hearing any case unless the subject initiates the action.Plaintiff is the most important issue in litigation, and it is an important prerequisite for public interest litigation to be carried out efficiently and fairly.Therefore, this article selects the public interest litigation system in the urgent need to clarify the problem-civil public interest litigation plaintiff qualification to discuss.The author holds that the plaintiff system of civil public interest litigation in our country should be composed of procuratorial organs, qualified social organizations and individuals, not including administrative organs.Around this viewpoint, this article is divided into two parts, a total of five chapters: the first part is the first chapter: the plaintiff summary of civil public interest litigation.This part first introduces the definition of public interest by scholars in different fields, and then briefly expounds the connotation of plaintiff qualification in civil public interest litigation.Then it analyzes the different theories of civil public interest litigation, affirms the theory of procedural parties and the interest theory of litigation as the theoretical basis of civil public interest litigation, and verifies theoretically the rationality of civil public interest litigation.The second part, from the second chapter to the fifth chapter, respectively discusses the popular subjects of public interest litigation in the form of special chapters-administrative organs, procuratorial organs, social organizations and individual citizens.The four chapters are basically the same style, citing famous cases in China in order to achieve vivid effect.The contents of each chapter generally include an overview, the legislation and litigation practice of each subject in China, the legal systems of some other countries and regions under the perspective of comparative law, and the feasibility of their being qualified plaintiffs in public interest litigation.However, in view of the characteristics of these four categories of subjects, the focus of attention is also slightly different. The administrative organs focus on analyzing the reasons why they should not be plaintiffs in public interest litigation, and the procuratorial organs pay some attention to summing up the present situation and problems.Social organizations mainly pay attention to the analysis and perfection of the existing laws and regulations, while individual citizens are more likely to explore the possibility of giving them the right of action in civil public interest litigation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海外國語大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 錢誠;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起公益訴訟的法理分析[J];法制博覽;2015年20期

2 杜穎;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起民事公益訴訟制度研究[J];中國檢察官;2015年11期

3 高琪;;我國環(huán)境民事公益訴訟的原告適格限制——以德國利他團(tuán)體訴訟制度為借鑒[J];法學(xué)評論;2015年03期

4 侯登華;;試論社會組織提起民事公益訴訟[J];政法論壇;2013年06期

5 羅冠男;;中西消費(fèi)者團(tuán)體訴訟權(quán)比較研究[J];法學(xué)雜志;2013年11期

6 張衛(wèi)平;;民事公益訴訟原則的制度化及實(shí)施研究[J];清華法學(xué);2013年04期

7 熊明;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)不宜成為民事公益訴訟的主體——以新修訂的民事訴訟法為視角[J];遼寧公安司法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年02期

8 趙澤君;陳濤;;從民事訴訟理念角度談檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起民事公益訴訟——兼評《民訴法修改決定》第55條之規(guī)定[J];中國檢察官;2013年07期

9 栗明;吳萍;;論公法視角下的公益訴訟原告資格[J];廣西社會科學(xué);2013年02期

10 龔學(xué)德;;行政機(jī)關(guān)不宜作為環(huán)境公益訴訟之原告論[J];求索;2013年01期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 馬守敏;;公益訴訟亟待開放[N];人民法院報;2001年

，

本文編號：1702719