论文部分内容阅读
环境损害概念分歧的背后是救济方式的不同。民事方式在环境生态损害的救济方面尽管不充分,但具有特定的预防功能。民事制度关于基本权利的界定和举证责任的规定对于行政权的实施也具有重要的补充功能。同民事救济相比,行政救济具有救济的几率大、救济启动早、救济效果好等优点。但行政救济的有效发挥要受到一系列社会条件的制约。环境损害从司法救济过渡到行政救济,既需要顺应历史发展趋势适时推动,也要做好前期的基础立法工作。
Behind the concept of environmental damage is the difference in relief. In spite of inadequate relief of environmental and ecological damage, civil methods have specific preventive functions. The definition of basic rights and the burden of proof in the civil system also have important supplementary functions for the implementation of administrative power. Compared with civil relief, administrative relief has a high probability of relief, relief started early, the relief effect is good and so on. However, the effective development of administrative remedies is subject to a series of social conditions. The transition from judicial remedy to administrative remedy for environmental damage needs to be promoted in a timely manner in keeping with the historical development trend, and the preparatory work on basic legislation as well.