碳达峰碳中和背景下我国“适度能动”之气候司法研究:域外实践与实现路径  

Study on "Moderate Climate Judicial Activism" in China under "Carbon Peak and Neutrality Goals" :A Comparative Perspective and Realization Pathways

作　　者：赵悦[1] ZHAO Yue

机构地区：[1]四川大学法学院,四川成都610207

出　　处：《中国地质大学学报（社会科学版）》2023年第2期31-42,共12页Journal of China University of Geosciences(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“我国气候变化司法应对理论与实践研究”(20CFX064)。

摘　　要：气候司法是我国气候应对治理体系的有机组成部分,可对气候立法、气候行政行“能动纠偏”之用。我国气候司法从被动、弱能动,当前呈现“强能动司法”的发展趋势,但司法政策和理论研究都对气候司法提出了“适度能动”的要求。本文意欲厘清中国语境下“适度能动”气候司法之实现路径。通过对中外气候能动司法实践与理论展开比较研究,本文认为,相较域外“造法型”气候能动司法,以“服务保障”国家气候变化应对政策为目标的中国“回应型”气候能动司法有着更广泛的“社会控制”意义,可以在更广阔的空间中发挥司法的气候治理作用。但中国能动司法不可跳脱出其宪法定位,不可代位甚至超越行政权和最高权力机关之立法权。气候司法于气候立法“补位而非代位”,于气候执法“辅助监督而非代位干涉”。中国“适度能动”回应型气候司法有“气候规制监督”“气候损害救济”“气候刑事惩戒”和“气候政策保障”四条实现路径,故此应强化检察机关气候法律监督职能,探索公益诉讼预防性功能,拓展“大环资审判”格局;减少公民个人承担气候刑事法律责任的情形;避免“绿色原则”之滥用,限制预防性检察行政诉讼的提起范围,审慎引入生态环境损害赔偿机制。Climate justice, an inherent aspect of China’s climate response governance system, can be used to “dynamically rectify” climate legislation and climate administration.China’s climate justice has progressed from passive justice and weak activism to the current trend of “strong judicial activism”,however both judicial policy and theoretical study have called for “moderate climate judicial activism”.This paper seeks to clarify the feasible path of moderate climate-related judicial activism in China.The paper argues that China’s “responsive” climate-enabled judicial practice has the potential to be more effective than foreign “law-making” climate-enabled judicial practice.The study suggests that compared with“law-making” climate activist justice in China, “responsive” climate activist justice has a broader interpretation of “social control” and plays a larger role in climate governance.Yet, China’s dynamic judiciary cannot deviate from its constitutional position and cannot usurp or even surpass the executive and legislative authority of the NPC,the ultimate authority.Climate justice is “supplementary rather than a replacement” for climate legislation and “supplementary oversight rather than a replacement” for climate law enforcement.China’s “moderately responsive” climate justice encompasses “climate regulation monitoring”,“climate harm repair”,“climate criminal discipline”,and “climate policy assurance”. Meanwhile, we should avoid the abuse of the “green principle”,limit the scope of preventive prosecution and administrative litigation, prudently introduce the mechanism for compensation for ecological and environmental damages, and avoid direct judicial intervention in matters of public policy, et al.

关 键 词：碳达峰碳中和 气候司法 适度能动司法 回应型司法 

分 类 号：D922.683.4[政治法律—环境与资源保护法学]