【摘要】：2012年修改的民事訴訟法響應(yīng)了眾多專家學(xué)者的呼吁，將公益訴訟作為一項(xiàng)新的制度予以確立。然而在現(xiàn)實(shí)情況中，大量的公益訴訟案件被阻擋在法院審判程序之外。而研究并解決公益訴訟起訴難問題對我國公益訴訟制度的發(fā)展有著重要意義，故本文從四個部分對公益訴訟起訴難問題進(jìn)行了研究分析。 第一章公益訴訟的概述。首先分析了公益訴訟的基本內(nèi)涵，明確了本文的研究對象是公民、團(tuán)體提起的民事公益訴訟，使得論述更具有針對性。其次分析了公益訴訟起訴現(xiàn)狀，法院審理公益訴訟案件極少，是因?yàn)楣嬖V訟案件難進(jìn)法院大門，呈現(xiàn)出起訴難的特點(diǎn)。 第二章先是分析了公益訴訟案件之所以面臨起訴難的尷尬，主要是因?yàn)榇祟惏讣旧砭哂行骂愋�、群體性、敏感性的特征。從當(dāng)前的司法環(huán)境來看，公益訴訟難以為法院受理，還存在著如下原因：案件范圍和起訴主體等法律規(guī)定模糊；我國公益訴訟模式較為保守；法院或因司法能力有限或?yàn)橐?guī)避風(fēng)險(xiǎn)而采取審慎的司法政策；司法最終解決理念仍未確立。 第三章是公益訴訟起訴的比較法研究，為下文提出公益訴訟起訴難對策提供借鑒。作者分別對美國、德國、日本、英國、印度等國家公益訴訟立法和司法實(shí)踐進(jìn)行了考察，，最后對國外在公益訴訟起訴方面存在特點(diǎn)作出評價：具有開明的理念；寬松的起訴資格；豐富的單行法規(guī)；發(fā)達(dá)的保障機(jī)制。 第四章是作者針對公益訴訟起訴難問題的解決所提出的對策。一是要從理念上樹立司法最終解決原則；二是在具體措施上要加快相關(guān)司法解釋及單行法的出臺；逐步放開公益訴訟中公民的起訴資格；給予公益訴訟起訴的救濟(jì)保障途徑；加強(qiáng)對立案法官的業(yè)務(wù)培訓(xùn)，充分發(fā)揮司法能動性。
[Abstract]:The revised civil procedure law in 2012 responds to the appeal of many experts and scholars and establishes public interest litigation as a new system. However, in reality, a large number of public interest litigation cases are blocked out of court proceedings. It is of great significance for the development of public interest litigation system to study and solve the problem of litigation difficulty in public interest litigation, so this paper makes a research and analysis on the problem of prosecution difficulty in public interest litigation from four parts. The first chapter is an overview of public interest litigation. Firstly, this paper analyzes the basic connotation of public interest litigation, and clarifies that the research object of this paper is civil public interest litigation initiated by citizens and groups, which makes the discussion more targeted. Secondly, the author analyzes the current situation of public interest litigation, the court hearing public interest litigation cases are very few, because public interest litigation cases are difficult to enter the court door, showing the characteristics of difficult prosecution. The second chapter first analyzes the embarrassment of public interest litigation cases facing prosecution, mainly because such cases have new types, group, sensitivity characteristics. From the current judicial environment, public interest litigation is difficult to be accepted by the court, there are also the following reasons: the scope of cases and the main body of prosecution are vague, the mode of public interest litigation in China is more conservative; Due to limited judicial capacity or prudent judicial policy in order to avoid risks, the concept of judicial final solution has not been established. The third chapter is a comparative study of public interest litigation. The author investigates the legislation and judicial practice of public interest litigation in America, Germany, Japan, Britain, India and so on. Finally, the author evaluates the characteristics of public interest litigation in foreign countries. Lenient qualifications for prosecution; a wealth of separate rules; developed safeguards. The fourth chapter is the author's solution to the difficult problem of public interest litigation. First, it is necessary to establish the principle of final judicial solution from the concept; second, to speed up the introduction of relevant judicial interpretation and special law in specific measures; to gradually liberalize citizens' qualification for prosecution in public interest litigation; to provide relief and protection channels for litigation in public interest litigation; Strengthen the professional training of the judges on file and give full play to the judicial initiative.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 蔡巍;;美國個人提起公益訴訟的程序和制度保障[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年04期

2 夏云嬌;;西方兩大法系環(huán)境行政公益訴訟之比較與借鑒[J];湖北社會科學(xué);2009年05期

3 許國鵬;論疑難案件中的法官角色——兼談法律的不確定性[J];法學(xué)雜志;2005年01期

4 李勁;;國外環(huán)境公益訴訟主體資格的確定及其借鑒[J];法學(xué)雜志;2011年10期

5 顏運(yùn)秋;周曉明;;公益訴訟制度比較研究——兼論我國公益訴訟制度的建立[J];法治研究;2011年11期

6 王海;;民事公益訴訟制度之比較研究[J];長春理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2014年03期

7 吳衛(wèi)星;;環(huán)境公益訴訟原告資格比較研究與借鑒——以美國、印度和歐盟為例[J];江蘇行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

8 張式軍;;德國環(huán)保NGO通過環(huán)境訴訟參與環(huán)境保護(hù)的法律制度介評——以環(huán)境公益訴訟中的“原告資格”為中心[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年04期

9 何艷梅;;國外環(huán)境公益訴訟制度及其對我國之借鑒[J];前沿;2009年11期

10 蘇文卿;訴訟法發(fā)展的新動向——國外公益訴訟制度鳥瞰[J];探索;2003年05期

本文編號：2325763