民事救济的环保功能有限性——再论环境侵权与环境侵害的关系  

The Limitedness of the Role Civil Remedies Play In Environmental Protection——Discussion on the Relation between Environmental Tort and Environmental Harm Again

作　　者：徐祥民[1] 辛帅[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国海洋大学法学院,青岛266100

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2016年第4期88-100,共13页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：教育部哲学社会科学发展报告项目(11JBGP044)"中国环境法制建设发展报告"(蓝皮书)

摘　　要：民事救济论者希望用民事法律保护环境,但对民事救济和环境损害两者的对接试验说明,民事救济可以对"他人"的人身财产权益提供有效救济,但无法对非"他人"的利益提供救济。环境利益是人类的利益,环境损害是对人类环境利益的损害。创造"环境权"的努力无法为人类环境利益创造具有自然人、法人身份的利益主体。民事救济手段中的救治已然损害的赔偿性责任方式、阻遏性责任方式、预防性责任方式都不能对环境损害提供救济。我们无法为环境损害找到符合民事救济制度中的责任人条件的行为人。造成环境损害的"总行为"的主体是不应按民法原理对行为负责,也没有能力对环境损害负责的"众人"。能够对环境损害负责的适格主体是政府,这已经在环境法制建设和环境保护实践中得到验证。Proposers of civil remedies theories hope to protect environment by civil law. However,experiment on civil remedies and environmental damage shows that civil remedies can only supply efficient remedies to personal rights and property rights,but not for environmental interests. Environmental interests are human interests,environmental damage infringes human environmental interests. Efforts in creation of environmental rights cannot form interest parties in human environmental interests having identity as natural person and cooperation. Compensational remedies for existed harm,injunctive remedies and preventive remedies cannot supply remedies for environmental damage. We cannot find tortfeasors for environmental harm as in terms of requirements in civil remedy system. Parties of＂Sum behavior＂causing environmental harm are the mass who shall not be liable to behavior according to civil theories and also not be able to be liable to environmental harm. The right party for environmental harm is government,which has been proved in environmental law construction and environment protection practice.

关 键 词：民事救济 环境侵害 环境损害 环境侵权 

分 类 号：DF468[政治法律—环境与资源保护法学]