兩岸環境行政公益訴訟制度之比較

中國大陸地區自2015年起，開展了為期兩年的檢察機關提起環境行政公益訴訟試點後，於2017年在大陸行政訴訟法中將該制度予以正式落實。中國大陸地區環境行政公益訴訟法制化之後，環境行政公益訴訟逐漸成為大陸地區檢察機關的業務新增長點以及學界探討的重要議題。臺灣對公益訴訟的探索遠早於大陸，公益訴訟於實踐之影響仍在不斷擴大。然則綜觀兩岸地區在環境保護問題上，皆存在當前環境法規範密度與數量具有相當規模的情況下而環境執法的實踐效果並不顯著的現象。為促使環境主管機關確實地負擔起權責，環境行政公益訴訟制度需通過環境保護法律規範與實踐操作等予以逐漸細化。環境行政公益訴訟之探索業已經多時，本文擬從制度、程序以及實務這三部分之比較展開論述，以期為環境行政公益訴訟實務操作及發展提供些許幫助，供海峽兩岸在環境行政公益訴訟制度上探討之參考。大陸地區行政公益訴訟制度雖然後起，但也具有一定特色，可供臺灣觀摩參考。另外，為促使環境行政公益訴訟制度切實發揮其實效，在兩地現行行政公益訴訟制度框架業已建立、認清環境行政公益訴訟為維護環境公共利益之有效而非最佳手段的基礎上，在之後的學理探討與實際操作中應繼續對環境行政公益訴訟制度予以補充完善。

關鍵字

環境行政公益訴訟；原告適格性；職責；判決；執行

並列摘要

The system was formally implemented in the Mainland China Administrative Litigation Act in 2017 after a two-year experiment of environmental administrative public interest litigation initiated by prosecutorial organization in 2015. After the legalization of environmental administrative public interest litigation in Mainland China, environmental administrative public interest litigation has gradually become a new working focus of the prosecutorial organization in mainland China and an important issue discussed by academia. Taiwan's exploration of public interest litigation is much earlier than that of Mainland China, and its influence on practice is expanding. However, in both sides of the Taiwan Strait, there exists a phenomenon that the density and quantity of current environmental laws and regulations have a considerable scale, while the practical effect of environmental law enforcement is not significant. In order to promote the environmental authorities to bear their responsibilities, the environmental administrative public interest litigation system needs to be gradually refined through the legal norms and practical operation of environmental protection. It has been a long time since the system of environmental administrative public interest litigation was established. This paper will discuss the comparison of systems, procedure and practical affairs, with a view to providing some help for the practical operation and development of environmental administrative public interest litigation, and providing a reference for the discussion of the environmental administrative public interest litigation system across the Taiwan Strait. Although the system of administrative public interest litigation in Mainland China has been developing since then, it also has certain characteristics, which can be used as a reference for Taiwan. In order to promote the effectiveness of environmental administrative public interest litigation system, on the basis of the establishment of the current framework of administrative public interest litigation system in the two places and the recognition that environmental administrative public interest litigation is an effective and not the best means to safeguard environmental public interest, we should continue to discuss the theory and practice of environmental administrative public interest litigation in the future, so as to supplement and improve the litigation system.