本論文係以環境公民訴訟制度為主要探討對象,探討的內容是環境公民訴訟是否能夠落實人權保障。所謂的訴訟,以傳統的角度來看,是基於自己的權利受侵害而向法院請求救濟的過程,不過公民訴訟之所以特別,是因為它跳脫了這個主觀的框架,在訴訟原告並未直接受有侵害的情況下,法律特別准許其對行政機關的違法事實提起訴訟。 雖然乍看之下原告起訴的行為可能被認為是無的放矢。但是我們知道在多數時候,對大眾之環境利益造成嚴重破壞是由於政府(的不作為)或企業所導致,而在這樣損害與獲益相當不均的情況,就可以稱為是不正義。因此公民訴訟就是使一般人可以跳脫訴權的限制,更自由地近用法院,達到矯正政府與私人破壞環境的行為。 而環境運動身為社會運動的一環,兩者追求的終極目標都是社會公義,與公民訴訟的目的是相同的。因此在環境運動蓬勃發展的時代立法者順應民意創立出了環境公民訴訟制度,而環境運動者也持續利用這個制度作為達成保護環境目標的工具。 基於環境利益被破壞後所帶來的影響之廣度、深度與不確定性,本文從證立人民的環境利益應具有權利性質開始,其次是環境運動與公民訴訟制度的淵源與發展,最後以美國的法院判決、說理為基礎,檢視我國在環境案件中,法院對人民的權利保護是否有先進國家的水準。並提出建議,希望可以作出貢獻。
This thesis focused on the theories and practices of citizen suit, especially on how citizen suits protect human rights. The so-called “lawsuit” means a civil action brought in a court of law in which a plaintiff, who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant actions, demands a legal or equitable remedy. But a citizen suit is a lawsuit by a private citizen to enforce a statute, and the plaintiff doesn’t have to be injuried. Although at first glance the prosecution may be considered pointless. We know the conducts of damaging the environment could harm many people, and the damagers are usually corporations, who make money, however, share the environmental cost with ordinary people, this is injustice. Citizen suits permit public access to the court system to challenge government and private decisions that fail to protect the environment or social well-being. Based on the uncertain affect of environmental degradation, this thesis starts with arguing the environmental benefits should be considered fundamental rights, then the origin and mutual development of environmental movement and citizen suit, finally compares the decisions courts made in Taiwan and U.S., the main purpose of writing this thesis is to provide a view of outsider which helps us to contemplate whether our court is adequated to play the role of guardian of human rights.
為了持續優化網站功能與使用者體驗,本網站將Cookies分析技術用於網站營運、分析和個人化服務之目的。
若您繼續瀏覽本網站,即表示您同意本網站使用Cookies。