民事公益诉讼的社会参与问题研究

论文总字数：22371字

摘 要

检察机关提起民事公益诉讼制度从试点到实施已经过了近三年时间，案件数量不增反减，保护公共利益的制度功能没有被充分激活，其重要原因是缺乏有效的社会参与机制。目前学界和实务界对相关问题缺乏重视，一定程度上加剧了民事公益诉讼制度的空心化困境。针对上述问题，本文首先基于法律利益分类的经典理论，试图重构“公共利益”的内涵外延，为社会参与民事公益诉讼构建法理基础；其次，实证考察社会公众在民事公益诉讼中的作用和地位，探讨改革公民诉讼参与方式、提高诉讼地位的机制路径；最后，结合域外经验探讨引入惩罚性赔偿制度激励公民参与民事公益诉讼的可行性。

笔者认为，在民事公益诉讼领域，作为工具性利益的个人利益能够成为抽象价值利益的公共利益的载体，社会参与有利于公共利益的保护。公民在民事公益诉讼中暂时不适宜作为原告，但需要在案件线索来源、调查取证以及诉讼全流程中拓展其参与机制，充分发挥其作为诉讼辅助人的作用。同时有必要引入和改良惩罚性赔偿制度作为激励机制，旨在提高社会公众在民事公益诉讼中的参与积极性。本研究将为解决民事公益诉讼制度空心化问题提供助力。

关键词：检察机关 民事公益诉讼 社会参与 惩罚性赔偿

ABSTRACT

Nearly three years have passed since the procuratorial organ initiated the civil public interest litigation system from the pilot to its implementation. The number of cases has not increased but decreased. The system function of protecting public interests has not been fully activated. The important reason is the lack of effective social participation mechanism. At present, the academic and practical circles pay little attention to relevant issues, which to some extent aggravates the hollowing-out predicament of the civil public interest litigation system. In order to solve the above problems, this article firstly attempts to reconstruct the connotation and extension of "public interest" based on the classical theory of classification of legal interests, and to build a legal basis for social participation in civil public interest litigation. Secondly, it empirically examines the role and position of the public in civil public interest litigation, and explores the mechanism path to reform the way citizens participate in litigation and improve the status of litigation. Finally, the feasibility of introducing punitive damages system to encourage citizens to participate in civil public interest litigation is discussed based on overseas experience.

The author believes that in the field of civil public interest litigation, personal interests as instrumental interests can become the carrier of public interests of abstract value interests, and social participation is conducive to the protection of public interests. Citizens are not suitable as plaintiffs for the time being in civil public interest litigation, but they need to expand their participation mechanism in the sources of case clues, investigation and evidence collection, and the whole process of litigation to give full play to their role as litigation assistants. At the same time, it is necessary to introduce and improve the punitive compensation system as an incentive mechanism to enhance the public's participation in civil public interest litigation. This study will provide assistance to solve the problem of hollowing out the civil public interest litigation system.

Key words: procuratorate, Civil public interest litigation, social participation, punitive damages

目 录

摘 要Ⅰ

AbstractⅡ

一、问题的提出1

二、社会参与的法理基础——对“公共利益”的再解读1

（一）传统“公共利益”的界定2

（二）传统“公共利益”界定对社会参与的限制3

1. 公共利益与国家利益的混淆3

2. 利益主体所代表利益的狭隘性 3

（三）对民事公益诉讼中“公共利益”的再解读3

1. 两层次利益分类的构建3

2. 个人利益对公共利益的工具性价值4

三、社会参与的实现渠道——公民诉讼地位的提高5

（一）社会参与民事公益诉讼的实证考察5

（二）公民在民事公益诉讼中的原告资格问题5

（三）公民在民事公益诉讼中诉讼地位的提高6

四、社会参与的激励机制——惩罚性赔偿机制的引入7

（一）惩罚性赔偿制度引入民事公益诉讼的理论基础7

1. 民事公益诉讼的本质——私人执法8

2. 惩罚性赔偿的功能定位8

3. 小结9

（二）将惩罚性赔偿引入民事公益诉讼的制度设计10

1. 适用范围10

2. 数额确定10

3. 赔偿金分配11

五、结语12

参考文献13

致谢15

一、问题的提出

2017年6月，全国人大常委会通过《关于修改lt;中国人民共和国民事诉讼法gt;和lt;中华人民共和国行政诉讼法gt;的决定》，从立法层面正式确立了检察机关提起民事公益诉讼原告的制度。2018年2月，《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于检察公益诉讼案件适用法律若干问题的解释》出台，检察机关提起民事公益诉讼的规定得到进一步完善。自此，从2015年全国人大常委会决定授权检察机关开展公益诉讼试点工作，已经经历了近三年的时间。随着相关法律规定的进一步完善，起诉主体范围的进一步扩充，检察机关提起公益诉讼的案件本应该呈井喷式增长。然而，相关数据表明，试点期结束后检察机关提起公益诉讼的数量呈明显的下降趋势。在试点期内，共有1126件检察机关提起的公益诉讼案件被全国法院受理，其中有938件案件被审结。而自2017年7月到该年年底，全国法院共受理的检察机关提起的公益诉讼案件257件，审结案件仅53件。^[1]

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：22371字