论环境公益诉讼的原告主体资格问题 外文翻译本科论文

"The plaintiff qualification of environmental public interest litigation"

Environmental problems have become widespread concern in twenty-first Century national problem. People in many conveniences to enjoy economic development progress of science and technology, do more, also began to reflect on and even questioned the "grace" to pay the price. With the increasingly severe environmental pollution, many individual citizens, social organization shave access to justice in order to solve the global problem, environmental public interest litigation and emerge as the times require. As a new type of lawsuit, it breaks through the limitation of traditional lawsuit plaintiff qualifications, plays a vital role in Protect environment, safeguarding the public interest, has been adopted by many countries in the world. The basic principle and the system based on the environmental public interest litigation, some problems on the plaintiff qualification of.

Environmental public interest litigation refers to the illegal administrative authorities or other public authorities, companies, enterprises or other organizations and individuals or omission, the environmental public interest to suffer infringe upon or at risk, the law permits a citizen or group to protect the environmental public interest litigation to the court system. Some America,Britain, the countries have confirmed the environmental public interest litigation system in legislation.

Characteristics of the environmental public interest litigation

First of all, from the lawsuit purpose, environmental public interest litigation for the plaintiff to allow non interested courts and cases, safeguard the interests of the plaintiff the foothold is not, but in promoting public welfare, environmental protection and public interests, advocated to environmental public interests rather than the interests of private environment.

Secondly, from the subject of litigation, environmental public interest litigationhas broken the limitation between the plaintiff and the case must have interest,starting from the protection of environmental public interest point of view, to any person or organization in the public environment facing the risk of harm or damage to the court to stop or restrain the damage to the right. Environmental public interest litigation expands the definition of traditional litigation system of the plaintiff.

Once again, from the function of litigation, environmental public interest litigation has obvious prevention function, both the recovery function. That the plaintiff can be sued in the possibility of environmental public interest there is damage,request the court to order the

defendant to stop related behavior, without the environmental damage has occurred as prerequisite of lawsuit.

Finally, look at the effect from the lawsuit, environmental public interest litigation involving the interests of the relationship with the public and collective, spread widely, the court in this litigation through the writ of prohibition or declaratory judgment tend to influence and change the public policy environment. This decision not only for the case of the people involved in the case have binding force, but also influence and guide to the general public is not involved in the case. The concept of environmental public litigation

The plaintiff qualification of the environmental public interest litigation refers to the environmental damage or damage. When the environmental public interest legal, can start the judicial remedy procedure qualification. Different plaintiff qualification and plaintiff status, qualification of the plaintiff from specific infringement has already made, the plaintiff status is the legal status of plaintiff qualification in people with proper court later during the course of litigation have.

To determine the standard of environmental public interest litigation plaintiff qualification Public interest litigation plaintiff should mainly consists of environmental public interest litigation purpose or aim of the establishment of environmental public interest litigation to decide, at the same time reference interest of other factors.In essence, the proposed source of environmental public interest litigation in the environment, it is the characteristics of the environment determines that any of are source or a regional environmental damage, will suffer the entirety of environment destruction, any pollution behavior, will be environmental public interests potential damage directly or indirectly. Therefore, to determine the plaintiff of environmental public interest litigation subject qualification of the environmental public interest must be achieved in order to ensure maximum as the standard.

Relaxation of environmental public litigation limit, so that all interested in environmental protection units and individuals have the qualification in the form of litigation in order to protect the environmental public interest. In order to achieve environmental public interest maximum as the standard to determine the plaintiff in environmental public interest litigation subject qualification, which requires in the judicial practice, must be free from restrictions on the plaintiff qualification of the existing procedure, to as many people as possible to attract public environment

protection, to achieve environmental public welfare maximum in order to.

The plaintiff in environmental public interest litigation subject range

A citizen, legal person, other organization. In response to the environmental pollution and the destruction of natural resources of the action, have the capacity for civil rights and capacity for civil conduct citizens, as long as he and polluting the environment, natural resources the destroyer has certain interests,whether this relation is actually already exist or may occur in the future, as long as you can prove this interest, all have the right to bring a lawsuit. Gives every citizen the prevention and control of environmental pollution and the destruction of natural resources rights, can better prevent hazards, protect the ecological environment we live together.

The two is a public benefit organization of environmental protection. China's"social organization registers bamboo regulations" second article: as mentioned in this Regulation refers to the social group, composed of voluntary Chinese citizens, in order to achieve a common intention of member, according to the nonprofit social organization in its articles of association activities. Therefore, the environmental protection commonweal organization general sense can be defined as the establishment, by nongovernmental organizations, individuals in accordance with law.

And to have their own independent regulation, organization, decision-making procedures and independent sources of funding for non-profit organizations,public welfare activities mainly engaged in environmental protection association.Individual citizens in environmental protection action, often in a weak position, in this case, the vigorous development of civil society groups, environmental organizations, and the government and the market to become the second force,and because of its public welfare, professional, volunteer, democratic participation, multiple benefit representative, can more effectively to solve complex environmental problems. Litigious right is thus given environmental protection commonweal organization environmental public interest, have a positive and practical significance.

The three is the procuratorial organs. Always the procuratorial organs are considered to be representative of the government, is the public interests maintenance. Some local officials in pursuit of the so-called achievements, to the land of chaos chaos, destruction and waste environment. Environmental administrative action of the government to make the administrative relative person is very extensive, although the environmental public interest litigation system to

solve the individual citizens not because of direct interest, may bring a lawsuit for public interests, but the individual behavior of litigation cost is too high. Therefore, a number of public benefit and nobody's embarrassment. So the recovery of public prosecution system, prosecution by the representative countries has the right of public prosecution as a prosecutor, can be realized in public to balance public purpose. In the judicial practice, also has been presented by the procurator ate the case on behalf of the state owned assets filed public interest litigation cases.

Other issues of environmental public interest litigation plaintiff qualification

The animal and natural objects as the environmental public interest litigation problems

Whether the given animal and nature with the plaintiff's qualification, Chinese scholars think: the animal and natural objects, they can be called as the main environmental right, too early but to become the plaintiff of the environmental public interest litigation. But I think, from the perspective of legal rights, not only has the rights of human beings, inanimate objects as the legal relationship between parties is not uncommon, such as ship, company, partnership, their rights and obligations and not because he would not speak, do not express and reduced, widespread corporate is further evidence that does not shortcomings of its own expression ability will become an obstacle to the exercise of the rights,obligations. In the specific operation can adopt a flexible way, as specified in the court litigation guardian, execution, protection, defense lawyers as a party.

Future generations as the plaintiff of environmental public interest litigation problems

Scholars have been raised, future generations should be the subjects of environmental rights, therefore have the right to file environmental public interest litigation, justice is the eternal pursuit of law, legal problems in environment should also implement the gist; legal justice is "human" and "people" between there sources and opportunities of equilibrium however, for the environment,resource system, this object because of the shared and non selective special properties such as fairness, it should not be confined to the reality of the existence of the people, should also take into consideration the interests of future generations, so future generations can enjoy the environmental rights and interests.

Ten the abuse of the right to consider

Some researchers worry about the relaxation of environmental public litigation limit, reduce litigation threshold, will likely lead to "litigation explosion", "lawsuittide". China's "harmony" idea ingrained, "detesting lawsuit" social psychology exist for a long time, hobbies, on the court is

not the court of common people;and action is needed to calculate the cost of economic activities, in addition to the case itself involved in litigation costs, legal fees, appraisal fees will also is not a small expenditure. The rational decision he will weigh the advantages and disadvantages for, will not be due to seek stimulation or impulsive choice action.

Therefore, in our country, litigation conditions relaxed does not necessarily cause "litigation tide". But as a system design should make corresponding response. In this regard, reference USA "citizen suit" relating to "prevent the abuse of litigation" provisions, formulate corresponding measures to prevent possible "lawsuit tide".

In short, in the treatment of environmental public litigation issues, we should not stick to the "direct interest relation theory", but also not free to expand the plaintiff of environmental public interest litigation subject qualification, do have a definite object in view. At the same time, to have obtained the qualification of plaintiff's party is necessary to prevent the abuse of litigious right limit, or fails to exercise the right to appeal behaviors.

Environmental public interest litigation subject theory

On the environmental public interest litigation subject theory, can be summarized as the following three:

The first theory is widely subject. The doctrine that, any unit and individual can file environmental public interest litigation. It is based on the "environmental protection law" sixth article: all units and individuals shall have the obligation to Protect environment, and have the right to report and accuse to the units and individuals for pollution and damage to the environment. We think, the right of accusation can not right, but the right of complaint should be a right of appeal. In order to realize the right of appeal, can with one's suit, the court asked the Supreme People's Court judicial interpretation, the nature of the right to appeal to the accused. If the nature of the right to appeal against the clear, then any unit and individual can be based on the provisions of the environmental pollution and damage sue.

Second kinds of theories are related groups, says. According to this theory, and environmental protection related social groups, non-governmental organizations,departments and units in his own name to bring environmental public interest litigation. "Friends of nature" specializing in environmental protection work, can be used as a club to bring environmental public interest litigation; Environmental Protection Bureau as a government agency to file environmental

public interest litigation. But, has nothing to do with the environmental protection units,organizations can not mention environmental public interest litigation. The doctrine exclusion of individuals can bring environmental public interest litigation,one reason is if give a personal file environmental public interest litigation subject qualification will lead to abuse of litigation, and increase the work intensity of judges.

The third theory called the public agency said. The doctrine that only exerciser elated public power organ may file environmental public interest litigation, for example, marine management department may bring a civil public welfare lawsuit of pollution damage to the marine environment; the agricultural sector may be filed public interest litigation on fishery pollution; procuratorial organs can be of any acts of destruction of the environment public interest litigation.

The practice of environmental public interest litigation

In practice, in the home is considered the environmental public interest litigation cases can be divided into the following five categories:

The first category is the environment public welfare lawsuit brought by non-governmental organizations. For example, in July 29, 2009, the financial network reported was placed on file in the court of Qingzhen City of Guizhou province the first national environmental administrative public interest litigation, the China Environment Federation to the identity of the plaintiff sued Guizhou Qingzhen city land resources bureau. The case was considered to be the environment public welfare lawsuit filed a civil organization.

The second category is the environmental public interest litigation in the name of the administrative organ to. In April 12, 2008, "Legal Daily" to "Guizhou Province,environmental public interest litigation judgment's first officer were the people win" reported that in 2007 the newly established Guiyang City, Hunan and Hubei provinces a Library Management Bureau as the plaintiff of the environmental public interest litigation, bring the pollution damage to the environment court lawsuit to Qingzhen City environmental protection requirements of court, PingbaCounty of Guizhou in a chemical limited stop pollution damage. In 2008 April,Qingzhen City People's Court of environmental protection in court, the defendant in a chemical industry company in Guizhou in the effective date of the judge ment to immediately stop using tailings waste plant for environmental damage, which is composed of administrative public interest litigation case.

The third category is the environment public welfare lawsuit filed by procuratorial organs. For example, in February 6, 2009, xinhua https://www.sodocs.net/doc/2211899076.html, "Changsha first with the procuratorial organ as plaintiff public interest litigation case" reported the management by the Wangcheng County of Hunan Province, the people's Procurator ate the case, 49 villagers were obtained in a cement plant dust,vibration, noise pollution compensation, a total of 62538 yuan per year. In particular the case is, the procuratorial organs is not for the society, also not for the country, only to the victims of the interests of the villagers, as civil plaintiffs filed public interest litigation.

The fourth category is filed by the citizen's environmental litigation. This kind of action is generally based on personal interests as the starting point to achieve the purpose of public welfare, for example, a Hanyang contractor Ma Chang song farms, the Municipal Water Affairs Bureau and the environmental protection agency fails to stop pollution legal duty, on two administrative organs in administrative proceedings, request the court to judge the defendant perform their statutory duties, to take immediate and effective measures, to stop the discharge of toxic and harmful sewage factories and enterprises, as well as to the sewage treatment unit has responsibility to stop pollution behavior; the defendant pay because it is not as a result of lake pollution, to the plaintiff causing economic losses of 20000 yuan. The plaintiff in administrative litigation,the local government commitment to control the water pollution, by the government to compensate the plaintiff 2000000 yuan after the withdrawal.Although the direct result of the case is the plaintiff received compensation, but the welfare effect requires the government to stop the whole lake pollution.

The fifth category is the folk public welfare organizations to help bring lawsuits.For example, at the China University of Political Science and Law CLAPV's help,Beijing City, Panjiayuan 182 residents sued the Beijing City Planning Commission, urges the Beijing City Planning Commission revoked the residents in the dense area construction animal experimental building permits. The direct beneficiaries of the case in the around 182 households, but the objective is for the entire the city of Beijing or its vicinity all residents are not affected by pollution, contribute to protect the region's air. The legal aid act is a public welfare behavior.

Analysis of the subject of environmental public interest litigation law

By analyzing the five kinds of case, can the following analysis and conclusion on the issue of environmental public interest litigation subject qualification to make:

First, the law should not stop people contribute to the public welfare. The law should encourage any human social welfare contributions. According to this idea,any unit and individual can serve as the plaintiff in public interest litigation. In other words, if a behavior is for the good development of society, as the social and public interests, so, the legal system should encourage this behavior.Therefore, any unit should have the subject of public interest litigation.

Second, the different legal status, the litigation subject qualification should be distinguished, different subjects may be filed public interest litigation different.Due to differences in individual ability, knowledge, and not all the people filed public interest litigation can play a important role in maintaining public interests.In order to avoid the waste of social resources, should be on the litigation subject qualification differ. I think, can do the following to distinguish litigation subject qualification: one is the individual citizens should combine their skills and concerns, filed environmental public interest litigation and administrative public interest litigation in a certain range. For example, as an environmental law professors, can be used as the subject of litigation filed environmental public interest litigation, but the public interest litigation can not bring the real estate field or the consumption field. Two is a non-governmental environmental protection organizations, social organizations can matters the articles of organization and work within the scope of the filed environmental public interest litigation and administrative public interest litigation, for example, "Friends of nature" as the folk environmental protection organization, you can mention environmental public interest litigation; however, mountain climbing association or sports Association will not mention environmental public interest litigation.

Third, the administrative organ should be in the end of administrative means is still not enough to protect the public environmental interests filed environmental public interest litigation. If the administrative organ filed environmental public interest litigation is the full exercise of laws and regulations to the administrative power, exhausted legal means such as punishment, ordered to cease all. Before I did not approve of the administrative organ in the absence of the exercise of its should fulfill the punishment, ordered to cease such statutory duties, that the claims filed a public interest litigation. For there is no direct victims of environmental pollution, the administrative organ may file for public interest litigation. For example, in rivers and lakes water pollution causes deaths of fish,don't have any relationship with the individual, the agricultural sector should be filed public interest litigation, claims for compensation on behalf of the state; ship oil spill

pollution of rivers and oceans, marine bureau should be filed public interest litigation claims.

论环境公益诉讼的原告主体资格问题

环境问题已经成为21世纪各国普遍关注的问题。人们在享受科技进步、经济发展做带来的诸多便利时，也开始反思甚至质疑这些“恩惠”所付出的代价。随着环境污染的日益严重，不少公民个人、社会组织等纷纷诉诸司法途径以求解决这些全球性的问题，环境公益诉讼于是应运而生。作为一种新型的诉讼，它突破了传统诉讼中对原告资格的诸多限制，在保护环境、维护公共利益方面发挥着至关重要的作用，目前已经被世界上许多国家所采用。本文结合环境公益诉讼的基本原理和制度，对原告主体资格的一些问题进行阐述。

环境公益诉讼是指由于行政机关或其他公共权力机构、公司、企业或其他组织及个人的违法行为或不作为，使环境公共利益遭受侵害或有侵害危险之时，法律允许公民或团体为维护环境公共利益而向法院提起诉讼的制度。美国、英国、口本等一些国家已经在立法上确认了环境公益诉讼制度。

环境公益诉讼的特征

首先，从诉讼目的看，环境公益诉讼允许与案件无利害关系人为原告向法院提起诉讼，其立足点不在于维护原告的权益，而在于促进公益，维护环境公共利益，主张指向环境公共利益而非私人的环境利益。

其次，从诉讼主体看，环境公益诉讼打破了原告与案件之间必须具有利害关系的限定，从维护环境公益的角度出发，赋予任何人或组织于环境公益面临损害或损害之虞时向法院提起诉讼制止或抑制损害的权利。环境公益诉讼拓展了传统诉讼体制下原告的界定。

再次，从诉讼功能看，环境公益诉讼具有明显的预防功能，兼具补救功能。即原告可以在环境公益存在损害的可能性时就提起诉讼，请求法院判决被告停止相关行为，而不必以环境损害业已发生作为诉讼提起的先决条件。

最后，从诉讼判决效力看，环境公益诉讼涉及的利益关系具有公共性和集合性，波及范围广泛，法院在这种诉讼中通过的禁止令状或宣告性判决往往影响和改变环境公共政策。这种判决不仅对本案的涉案人产生拘束力，而且对未涉案的一般公众也产生影响力和引导力。

环境公益诉讼原告资格的概念

环境公益诉讼的原告资格是指在环境公益遭受损害或有遭受损害之虞时，可以合法启动环境公益司法救济程序的资格。原告资格与原告地位不同，原告资格从受到具体侵害时起就已经取得，原告地位则是具有原告资格的人诉至法院后在诉讼的过程中所拥有的法律地位。

环境公益诉讼原告主体资格的确定标准

益诉讼的原告应该主要地由环境公益诉讼的宗旨或者建立环境公益诉讼的根本目的来决定，同时参考其他的利益因素。从本质上说，环境公益诉讼问题的提出源于环境的整体性，正是环境的这一特性决定了任何对某一资源或某一区域环境的损坏，都将可能遭致对环境整体性的破坏，任何一个污染行为，都将直接或者间接的损害公众潜在的环境利益。因此，环境公益诉讼原告主体资格的确定必须以最大限度的保证环境公益的实现为标准。

放宽对环境公益诉讼原告资格的限制，以便所有有志于环境公益保护的单位和个人均有资格以诉讼的形式实现对环境公益的保护。以最大限度的实现环境公益为标准来确定环境公益诉讼原告的主体资格，这就要求在司法实践中，必须摆脱现有诉讼法中对原告资格的诸多限制，将尽可能多的人吸引到环境公益保护中来，以期能够最大限度的实现环境公益。

环境公益诉讼原告的主体范围

一是公民、法人、其他组织。在针对环境污染和自然资源破坏的诉讼中，有民事权利能力和民事行为能力的公民，只要他与环境污染者、自然资源破坏者的行为有一定利益关系，不管这种利害关系是实际已经存在还是可能发生在将来，只要能证明有这种利益关系，都有权提起诉讼。赋予每个公民防治环境污染和自然资源破坏的权利，能够更好的防范危害的发生，维护我们共同居住的生态环境。

二是环境保护公益组织。我国《社会团体登记竹理条例》第2条规定:本条例所指社会团体，是指中国公民自愿组成，为实现会员共同意愿，按照其章程开展活动的非盈利性社会组织。由此可见，环境保护公益组织一般意义上可以界定为，由民间团体、个人依法建立

和参加并有自己独立的章程、组织机构、决策程序和独立资金来源的非赢利性组织，主要从事环境保护的公益性活动的社团。公民个人在环境保护诉讼中，往往

处于弱势地位，在这种情况下，民间社会团体的环保组织蓬勃发展，成为与政府和市场抗衡的第二种力量，并因其公益性、专业性、志愿性、民主参与、多元利益代表性等，能更有效的解决复杂的环境问题。因此赋予环保公益组织环境公益的诉权，具有积极的现实意义。

三是检察机关。历来检察机关都被认为是政府的代表，是公共权益的维护者。有的地方官员为了追求所谓的政绩，对土地乱批乱建，造成环境的破坏和浪费情况。政府的环境行政行为使行政相对人十分广泛，虽然环境公益诉讼制度解决了公民个人不因直接利害关系，可以为公共利益提起诉讼的权利，但个人行为方式诉讼成本太高。因此会形成一些公共利益受害而无人过问的尴尬场面。因而恢复检察机关公诉制度，由代表国家具有公诉权的检察机关作为起诉人，可以实现以公权来制衡公权的目的。在司法实践中，也己经出现了由检察院代表国家对国有资产流失等案件提起公益诉讼的案例。

环境公益诉讼原告主体资格的其他问题

动物和自然物作为环境公益诉讼的原告的问题

对于是否该赋予动物和自然物以原告资格的问题，我国学者认为：对于动物和自然物而言，他们可以称为环境权的主体，但是要成为环境公益诉讼的原告为时尚早。但我认为，从法律权利主体来看，人类并非权利的唯一拥有者，无生命的物作为法律关系的当事人并不少见，如船舶、公司、合伙等，他们的权利义务并没有因为自己不会说话、不会表达而有所减免，社团法人的广泛存在也进一步证明自身表达能力的缺陷并不必然成为其行使权利、履行义务的的障碍。在具体操作上可以采用灵活方式加以处理，正如诉讼中法院为某一当事人指定监护人、执行人、保护人、辩护律师等。

后代人作为环境公益诉讼原告的问题

学界不断有人提出，后代人也应该是环境权的主体，因此也有权提起环境公益诉讼，公平是法律永恒的追求，在环境法律问题上也应该贯彻这一要旨；法律追求的公平是“人”与“人”之间资源和机会的均衡分配，然而，对于环境资源系统而言，这种对象由于具有共享性和非选择性等特殊属性，公平就不应该局限于现实存在的人之间，还应该考虑后代人的利益，所以后代人也享有环境权益。

关十滥诉的考虑

有些学者担心放宽对环境公益诉讼原告资格的限制、降低了诉讼门槛，将有可能引发“诉讼爆炸”、“诉讼潮”。我国“以和为贵”的思想根深蒂固，“厌讼”的社会心理长期存在，打官司、上公堂并非寻常百姓的爱好；何况诉讼是需要计算经济成本的活动，除了案件本身涉及的诉讼费用，律师费用、鉴定费用等也将是一笔不小的开支。人的理性决定他会权衡利弊而为之，绝不会因寻求刺激或一时冲动而选择诉讼。

因此，在我国，诉讼条件放宽并不必然引起“诉讼潮”的发生。但作为一种制度设计还是应该就此作出相应的回应。对此，可借鉴美国“公民诉讼”中有关“防止滥诉”的规定，制定相应措施以防止可能发生的“诉讼潮”。

总之，在对待环境公益诉讼原告资格的问题上，我们既不能固守“直接利害关系理论”，但也不得随意扩大环境公益诉讼原告主体资格，要做到有的放矢。同时，对于已经获得原告资格的一方也有必要进行必要的限制，以防止其滥用诉权或者怠于行使诉权行为的发生。

环境公益诉讼主体的学说

关于环境公益诉讼主体的学说，可以概括为以下三种：

第一种学说是广泛主体说。该学说认为，任何单位和个人都可以提起环境公益诉讼。其依据是《环境保护法》第6条：一切单位和个人都有保护环境的义务，并有权对污染和破坏环境的单位和个人进行检举和控告。我们认为，检举权可以不算是诉权，但控告权应当是一种诉权。要实现这个诉权，可以通过某人提起诉讼后，由法院请示最高人民法院作出司法解释，来明确控告的诉权性质。如果控告的诉权性质得到明确，那么任何单位和个人都可以依据该条文以环境污染和破坏为由提起诉讼。

第二种学说是相关团体、组织说。该学说认为，与环境保护相关的社会团体、民间组织、机关单位可以自己的名义提起环境公益诉讼。“自然之友”专门从事环境保护工作，可以作为社团提起环境公益诉讼;环境保护局作为政府机构可以提起环境公益诉讼。但是，与环境保护无关的单位、组织则不能提起环境公益诉讼。该学说排除了个人可以提起环境公益诉讼，其中一个理由是如果赋予个人提起环境公益诉讼主体的资格会导致诉权滥用，进而增加法官们的工作强度。

第三种学说叫公权机构说。该学说认为只有行使相关公共权力的机关可以提起环境公益诉讼，比如，海洋管理部门可以对海洋环境污染损害提起民事公益诉讼;农业部门可以对渔业污染提起公益诉讼;检察机关可以对任何破坏环境的行为提起公益诉讼。

环境公益诉讼的实践

实践中，在国内被认为是环境公益诉讼的案例可以归纳为以下五类：

第一类是由民间组织提起的环境公益诉讼。比如，2009年7月29日，财经网报道了全国首例环境公益行政诉讼在贵州省清镇市法院获得立案，中华环保联合会以原告身份状告贵州省清镇市国土资源管理局。该案被认为是一个民间组织提起的环境公益诉讼。

第二类是以行政机关的名义提起的环境公益诉讼。在2008年4月12日，《法制日报》以“贵州省环境公益诉讼案判决首例官告民胜诉”为题报道了2007年新成立的贵阳市两湖一库管理局作为环境公益诉讼的原告，向清镇市法院环境保护法庭提起环境污染损害诉讼，要求平坝县境内的贵州某化工有限公司停止污染侵害。2008年4月清镇市人民法院环境保护法庭判决，被告贵州某化工有限公司在判决生效之日起立即停止使用磷石膏尾矿废渣厂对于环境的侵害，这是由行政机关提起公益诉讼的案例。

第三类是检察机关提起的环境公益诉讼。例如，2009年2月6日，新华网以“长沙首起以检察机关为原告的公益诉讼案结案”为题报道的由湖南省望城县人民检察院办理的一起案件中，49户村民获得了某水泥厂灰尘、振动、噪声污染补偿款，共计每年62538元。该案的特别之处在于，检察机关不是为了社会，也不是为了国家，仅仅为了这些受害村民的利益，作为民事诉讼的原告提起公益诉讼。

第四类是由公民个人提起的环境诉讼。这类诉讼一般都是以私益为出发点达到公益的目的，比如，某市汉阳渔场养殖承包人马长松，以该市水务局和环保局不履行制止污染的法定职责为由，对两个行政机关提起行政诉讼，请求法院判定被告履行法定职责，立即采取有效措施，制止排放有毒有害污水的工厂企业，以及对生活污水负有处理职责的单位停止污染行为;判决被告赔偿因其不作为导致湖泊被污染，给原告造成的经济损失2万元。原告提起行政诉讼后，当地政府承

诺要对湖水污染进行治理，由政府补偿原告200万元后，原告撤诉。虽然该案的直接结果是原告得到赔偿，但是却达到了要求政府制止整个湖泊污染的公益效果。

第五类是由民间公益组织帮助而提起的诉讼。比如，在中国政法大学污染受害者法律帮助中心的帮助下，北京市潘家园182户居民起诉北京市规划委，促使北京市规划委撤销了在居民稠密区建设动物实验楼的许可证.该案胜诉后的直接受益者是周围的182户居民，但客观上也为整个北京市或者其附近地区所有居民不受污染影响，为保护该地区的空气做出了贡献。这种法律帮助行为也是一种公益行为。

环境公益诉讼主体资格的法律分析

通过对上述五类案例的分析，可以就环境公益诉讼的主体资格问题作出以下几点分析和结论：

第一，法律不应当阻止人们为社会公益做贡献。法律应该鼓励任何人为社会公益做贡献。按照该理念，任何单位和个人都可以作为公益诉讼的原告。换而言之，如果某行为是为了促进社会的良好发展，为社会公共利益服务，那么，法律制度就应该鼓励该行为。因此，任何单位都应该有公益诉讼主体的资格。

第二，法律地位不同，其诉讼主体资格也应有所区分，不同的主体可以提起不同的公益诉讼。因个人能力、知识等方面的差异，并不是所有人提起公益诉讼都能发挥维护公共利益的作用。为避免浪费社会资源，应该对诉讼主体的资格有所区别。本人认为，可以对诉讼主体资格做如下区分：一是公民个人应结合自身的能力和关注点，在一定范围内提起环境民事公益诉讼和环境行政公益诉讼。例如，作为一个环境法专业的教授，可以作为诉讼主体提起环境公益诉讼，但不能提起房地产领域或消费领域的公益诉讼。二是民间环保组织、社会团体可以就其组织章程和工作范围内的事项提起环境民事公益诉讼和环境行政公益诉讼，比如，“自然之友”作为民间环保组织，可以提起环境公益诉讼;但是，爬山协会或者体育协会就没有提起环境公益诉讼的资格。

第三，行政机关应在其穷尽行政手段后仍不足以保护公共环境利益时提起环境民事公益诉讼。行政机关提起环境民事公益诉讼的前提是已经充分行使了法律法规赋予的行政权力，穷尽了诸如处罚、责令停产停业等所有的合法手段。本人

并不赞成行政机关在没有行使其应当履行的处罚、责令停产停业等法定职责之前，就以为受害人索赔为由提起公益诉讼。对于没有直接受害人的环境污染，行政机关可以提起只为了公共利益的诉讼。比如，江河湖泊里发生水污染导致鱼死亡，跟个人没有任何关系，农业部门应该提起公益诉讼，代表国家要求赔偿;船舶石油泄漏污染河流和海洋，海洋局应提起公益诉讼要求赔偿。

毕业论文英文参考文献与译文

Inventory management Inventory Control On the so-called "inventory control", many people will interpret it as a "storage management", which is actually a big distortion. The traditional narrow view, mainly for warehouse inventory control of materials for inventory, data processing, storage, distribution, etc., through the implementation of anti-corrosion, temperature and humidity control means, to make the custody of the physical inventory to maintain optimum purposes. This is just a form of inventory control, or can be defined as the physical inventory control. How, then, from a broad perspective to understand inventory control? Inventory control should be related to the company's financial and operational objectives, in particular operating cash flow by optimizing the entire demand and supply chain management processes (DSCM), a reasonable set of ERP control strategy, and supported by appropriate information processing tools, tools to achieved in ensuring the timely delivery of the premise, as far as possible to reduce inventory levels, reducing inventory and obsolescence, the risk of devaluation. In this sense, the physical inventory control to achieve financial goals is just a means to control the entire inventory or just a necessary part; from the perspective of organizational functions, physical inventory control, warehouse management is mainly the responsibility of The broad inventory control is the demand and supply chain management, and the whole company's responsibility. Why until now many people's understanding of inventory control, limited physical inventory control? The following two reasons can not be ignored: First, our enterprises do not attach importance to inventory control. Especially those who benefit relatively good business, as long as there is money on the few people to consider the problem of inventory turnover. Inventory control is simply interpreted as warehouse management, unless the time to spend money, it may have been to see the inventory problem, and see the results are often very simple procurement to buy more, or did not do warehouse departments . Second, ERP misleading. Invoicing software is simple audacity to call it ERP, companies on their so-called ERP can reduce the number of inventory, inventory control, seems to rely on their small software can get. Even as SAP, BAAN ERP world, the field of

概率论毕业论文外文翻译

Statistical hypothesis testing Adriana Albu，Loredana Ungureanu Politehnica University Timisoara,adrianaa@aut.utt.ro Politehnica University Timisoara,loredanau@aut.utt.ro Abstract In this article,we present a Bayesian statistical hypothesis testing inspection, testing theory and the process Mentioned hypothesis testing in the real world and the importance of, and successful test of the Notes. Key words Bayesian hypothesis testing; Bayesian inference;Test of significance Introduction A statistical hypothesis test is a method of making decisions using data, whether from a controlled experiment or an observational study (not controlled). In statistics, a result is called statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance alone, according to a pre-determined threshold probability, the significance level. The phrase "test of significance" was coined by Ronald Fisher: "Critical tests of this kind may be called tests of significance, and when such tests are available we may discover whether a second sample is or is not significantly different from the first."[1] Hypothesis testing is sometimes called confirmatory data analysis, in contrast to exploratory data analysis. In frequency probability,these decisions are almost always made using null-hypothesis tests. These are tests that answer the question Assuming that the null hypothesis is true, what is the probability of observing a value for the test statistic that is at [] least as extreme as the value that was actually observed?) 2 More formally, they represent answers to the question, posed before undertaking an experiment,of what outcomes of the experiment would lead to rejection of the null hypothesis for a pre-specified probability of an incorrect rejection. One use of hypothesis testing is deciding whether experimental results contain enough information to cast doubt on conventional wisdom. Statistical hypothesis testing is a key technique of frequentist statistical inference. The Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing is to base rejection of the hypothesis on the posterior probability.[3][4]Other approaches to reaching a decision based on data are available via decision theory and optimal decisions. The critical region of a hypothesis test is the set of all outcomes which cause the null hypothesis to be rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis. The critical region is usually denoted by the letter C. One-sample tests are appropriate when a sample is being compared to the population from a hypothesis. The population characteristics are known from theory or are calculated from the population.

论环境公益诉讼的原告主体资格问题 外文翻译本科论文

"The plaintiff qualification of environmental public interest litigation" Environmental problems have become widespread concern in twenty-first Century national problem. People in many conveniences to enjoy economic development progress of science and technology, do more, also began to reflect on and even questioned the "grace" to pay the price. With the increasingly severe environmental pollution, many individual citizens, social organization shave access to justice in order to solve the global problem, environmental public interest litigation and emerge as the times require. As a new type of lawsuit, it breaks through the limitation of traditional lawsuit plaintiff qualifications, plays a vital role in Protect environment, safeguarding the public interest, has been adopted by many countries in the world. The basic principle and the system based on the environmental public interest litigation, some problems on the plaintiff qualification of. Environmental public interest litigation refers to the illegal administrative authorities or other public authorities, companies, enterprises or other organizations and individuals or omission, the environmental public interest to suffer infringe upon or at risk, the law permits a citizen or group to protect the environmental public interest litigation to the court system. Some America,Britain, the countries have confirmed the environmental public interest litigation system in legislation. Characteristics of the environmental public interest litigation First of all, from the lawsuit purpose, environmental public interest litigation for the plaintiff to allow non interested courts and cases, safeguard the interests of the plaintiff the foothold is not, but in promoting public welfare, environmental protection and public interests, advocated to environmental public interests rather than the interests of private environment. Secondly, from the subject of litigation, environmental public interest litigationhas broken the limitation between the plaintiff and the case must have interest,starting from the protection of environmental public interest point of view, to any person or organization in the public environment facing the risk of harm or damage to the court to stop or restrain the damage to the right. Environmental public interest litigation expands the definition of traditional litigation system of the plaintiff. Once again, from the function of litigation, environmental public interest litigation has obvious prevention function, both the recovery function. That the plaintiff can be sued in the possibility of environmental public interest there is damage,request the court to order the

毕业论文外文翻译模版

吉林化工学院理学院 毕业论文外文翻译English Title（Times New Roman ，三号） 学生学号：08810219 学生姓名：袁庚文 专业班级：信息与计算科学0802 指导教师：赵瑛 职称副教授 起止日期：2012.2.27～2012.3.14 吉林化工学院 Jilin Institute of Chemical Technology

1 外文翻译的基本内容 应选择与本课题密切相关的外文文献（学术期刊网上的），译成中文，与原文装订在一起并独立成册。在毕业答辩前，同论文一起上交。译文字数不应少于3000个汉字。 2 书写规范 2.1 外文翻译的正文格式 正文版心设置为：上边距：3.5厘米，下边距：2.5厘米，左边距：3.5厘米，右边距：2厘米，页眉：2.5厘米，页脚：2厘米。 中文部分正文选用模板中的样式所定义的“正文”，每段落首行缩进2字；或者手动设置成每段落首行缩进2字，字体：宋体，字号：小四，行距：多倍行距1.3，间距：前段、后段均为0行。 这部分工作模板中已经自动设置为缺省值。 2.2标题格式 特别注意：各级标题的具体形式可参照外文原文确定。 1．第一级标题（如：第1章绪论）选用模板中的样式所定义的“标题1”，居左；或者手动设置成字体：黑体，居左，字号：三号，1.5倍行距，段后11磅，段前为11磅。 2．第二级标题（如：1.2 摘要与关键词）选用模板中的样式所定义的“标题2”，居左；或者手动设置成字体：黑体，居左，字号：四号，1.5倍行距，段后为0，段前0.5行。 3．第三级标题（如：1.2.1 摘要）选用模板中的样式所定义的“标题3”，居左；或者手动设置成字体：黑体，居左，字号：小四，1.5倍行距，段后为0，段前0.5行。 标题和后面文字之间空一格（半角）。 3 图表及公式等的格式说明 图表、公式、参考文献等的格式详见《吉林化工学院本科学生毕业设计说明书（论文）撰写规范及标准模版》中相关的说明。

浅谈民事环境公益诉讼原告主体

浅谈民事环境公益诉讼原告主体 发表时间：2018-04-12T15:48:10.673Z 来源：《知识－力量》2018年1月上作者：胡荣华 [导读] 根据《民事诉讼法》第55条，法律规定的机关和有关组织可以向人民法院提起环境公益诉讼。 胡荣华[ 作者简介：胡荣华（1992.4—），男，河南省驻马店人，成都市双流区四川大学法律硕士专业硕士研究生] （四川大学四川成都 610207） 摘要：根据《民事诉讼法》第55条，法律规定的机关和有关组织可以向人民法院提起环境公益诉讼，该条明确了环境公益诉讼的原告类型和民事诉讼性质，两高的相关司法解释也进一步详细明晰了环境民事公益诉讼的原告主体类型。但是，有关民事环境公益的原告主体的相关理论仍不够明晰，尤其是以下问题仍有待回答：其一，检察院提起民事环境公益诉讼的合理性与正当性；其二，行政机关是否有提起民事公益诉讼的资格；其三，环保组织提起民事环境公益诉讼的制度仍有待完善；其四，是否应当赋予公民提起民事环境公益“集团诉讼”的资格。本文就以上四个问题做了简要的探析，以期能够对完善民事环境公益诉讼原告主体制度有所裨益。 关键词：民事环境公益诉讼；原告主体；公益组织；公民团体 前言 随着工业发展，类似消费欺诈、环境污染等侵害公共利益的侵权行为日益增多，现实中又存在举证困难、难以找到直接现时受害人等问题存在。如何有效的保护被侵害群体利益，成为解决此类事件的当务之急。我国近两年出台了相关法律法规，确立公益诉讼这一诉讼模式，但是仍然有很多现实问题亟待厘清与完善，其中一个重要的问题就是环境公益诉讼主体资格问题。进一步理解和把握环境公益诉讼主体资格问题，有助于我们更好的通过公益诉讼维护群体利益，保障生态环境的良好发展。 检察院提起民事环境公益诉讼的合理性与正当性 2015年第十二届全国人大常委会第十五次会议通过了《关于授权最高人民检察院在部分地区开展公益诉讼试点工作的决定》，该《决定》对《民事诉讼法》第55 条“对污染环境、侵害众多消费者合法权益等损害社会公共利益的行为，法律规定的机关和有关组织可以向人民法院提起诉讼”中法律规定的机关进行了进一步阐述，即最高人民检察院可以在生态环境和资源保护、国有资产保护、国有土地使用权出让、食品药品安全等领域开展提起公益诉讼试点。随之，最高人民检察院出台了《检察机关提起公益诉讼试点方案》，提出“针对生态环境和资源保护等领域侵害国家和社会公共利益的情况，及时提起民事或行政公益诉讼”。尽管在民事环境公益诉讼中检察机关还存在身份冲突问题:其既充当着案件的原告当事人或是起诉的支持者的角色，同时也具有法律监督者份。[1]但是，《人民检察院组织法》对检察机关的职能定位规定检察机关的法定职责之一就是保护集体财产、国家财产等具有公共性质的利益。此外，国外法学界“公共信托理论”对检察机关提出民事环境公益诉讼的合理性与正当性也提供了理论支撑，美国学者约瑟夫·萨克斯教授认为: “阳光、水、野生动植物等环境要素是全体公民的共有财产，公民为了管理它们的共有财产，而将其委托给政府，政府与公民从而建立起信托关系。” [2]因此，由检察机关作为主体提起环境公益诉讼有着其坚实的法律依据和理论基础，同时在国际社会上也有着先例，具有正当性和合理性。 完善环保组织提起民事环境公益诉讼的制度 根据《民事诉讼法》第５５条，法律规定的机关和有关组织可以向人民法院提起环境公益诉讼。该条明确了环境公益诉讼的原告类型和民事诉讼性质。《环境保护法》第５８条规定了有权提起公益诉讼的环保组织需要满足的条件。环保组织具有提起民事环境公益诉讼的正当性无需再做过多的争辩与探讨。然而，正如前文已经有所提及的一点：环保组织提起民事环境公益诉讼具有一定的局限性，概括地说，主要有以下三点：其一，其提起环境公益诉讼具有一定自发性、盲目性，易滥用诉权；其二，其往往局限于某一具体领域的环保问题，而缺少整体全面的环保意识；其三，其作为非官方组织缺乏强制力来监督确保环境公益诉讼后的生态恢复情况。针对以上三点，笔者认为可从三方面予以完善：其一，政府需对环保组织提起环境公益诉讼予以一定的支持与引导，并出台更加细化的法律规则来规范环保组织行使环境公益诉讼的权力；其二，要鼓励各类型环保组织的设立及发展，尽可能做到对环保领域的全覆盖，同时，上文提到的赋予行政机关提起环境公益诉讼的资格也有利于弥足环保组织的不足；其三，进一步落实环境公益诉讼司法解释和《最高人民法院、民政部、环境保护部关于贯彻实施环境民事公益诉讼制度的通知》要求行政机关应当在确定生态环境修复费用、方式和结果审查以及环境监管信息提供方面给予配合的规定，并且以法院以及行政机关的强制力做双重保障，保证环境生态修复的目的能够完满实现。[3] 赋予公民提起民事环境公益“集团诉讼”的资格 有学者认为，传统民事诉讼所保护的客体是民事私益，而环境民事公益诉讼所保护的客体则是环境公益。[4]对此，笔者并不赞同。环境民事公益诉讼所保护的客体是环境公益基本正确，但是环境公益就其本质来言与私人的环境权益不可能无涉。正如像国外的“环境权”理论，其认为每个公民都享有最基本的环境权益，享有呼吸新鲜空气、饮用纯净水的权利，因此，对环境生态的侵害即使看似未涉及私人权益，但是其最终也是对每个公民环境权的侵害。当然，不可能赋予每个公民都有提起环境公益诉讼的权利，而必须有所限制。具体而言，可以由受到环境污染影响的公民集体联合提起环境公益“集团诉讼”，而诉讼所得之赔偿金则可以在法院的协助与监督下用于修复当地之生态。笔者认为，将提起环境公益诉讼的主体扩展至一般公民团体有利于提高环境保护的力度，让“全民参与”环境公益诉讼从而提高社会的环保维权参与意识，让污染环境的企业感受到社会压力，从而不敢污染环境，最终实现社会的可持续发展。 结语 本文对提起民事环境公益诉讼的四类原告主体的相关问题作了简要的论述，旨在构建和完善我国的民事环境公益诉讼原告主体论，以期对民事环境公益诉讼的发展和实践能起到一定的借鉴意义。笔者认为，就我国的民事环境公益诉讼而言，构建和完善民事环境公益诉讼原告主体制度还有很长的路要走：首先是要进一步理顺民事环境公益诉讼原告的基本理论问题：诉讼资格、相互关系、诉讼利益分配等；其次，要进一步完善相关的法律及司法解释，明晰民事环境公益诉讼原告如何参与诉讼；最后，要进一步规范民事环境公益诉讼原告的诉讼行为，保证民事环境公益诉讼的实效性，争取污染环境的相关主体都能得到应有的惩戒，承担相应的责任，确保生态环境可以最终切实得到恢复。 参考文献： [1] 白彦.检察机关提起公益诉讼的现实困境与对策研究[J]. 法学杂志. 2016（3）. [2] Sax J L． The Public Trust Doctrine in Natural Ｒesource Law［J］． Michigan Law Ｒeview. 1970( 3).

毕业论文外文翻译模板

农村社会养老保险的现状、问题与对策研究社会保障对国家安定和经济发展具有重要作用，“城乡二元经济”现象日益凸现，农村社会保障问题客观上成为社会保障体系中极为重要的部分。建立和完善农村社会保障制度关系到农村乃至整个社会的经济发展，并且对我国和谐社会的构建至关重要。我国农村社会保障制度尚不完善，因此有必要加强对农村独立社会保障制度的构建，尤其对农村养老制度的改革，建立健全我国社会保障体系。从户籍制度上看，我国居民养老问题可分为城市居民养老和农村居民养老两部分。对于城市居民我国政府已有比较充足的政策与资金投人，使他们在物质和精神方面都能得到较好地照顾，基本实现了社会化养老。而农村居民的养老问题却日益突出，成为摆在我国政府面前的一个紧迫而又棘手的问题。 一、我国农村社会养老保险的现状 关于农村养老，许多地区还没有建立农村社会养老体系，已建立的地区也存在很多缺陷，运行中出现了很多问题，所以完善农村社会养老保险体系的必要性与紧迫性日益体现出来。 （一）人口老龄化加快 随着城市化步伐的加快和农村劳动力的输出，越来越多的农村青壮年人口进入城市，年龄结构出现“两头大，中间小”的局面。中国农村进入老龄社会的步伐日渐加快。第五次人口普查显示：中国65岁以上的人中农村为5938万，占老龄总人口的67.4%.在这种严峻的现实面前，农村社会养老保险的徘徊显得极其不协调。 （二）农村社会养老保险覆盖面太小 中国拥有世界上数量最多的老年人口，且大多在农村。据统计，未纳入社会保障的农村人口还很多，截止2000年底，全国7400多万农村居民参加了保险，占全部农村居民的11.18%，占成年农村居民的11.59%.另外，据国家统计局统计，我国进城务工者已从改革开放之初的不到200万人增加到2003年的1.14亿人。而基本方案中没有体现出对留在农村的农民和进城务工的农民给予区别对待。进城务工的农民既没被纳入到农村养老保险体系中，也没被纳入到城市养老保险体系中，处于法律保护的空白地带。所以很有必要考虑这个特殊群体的养老保险问题。

浅论行政公益诉讼原告资格问题

浅论行政公益诉讼原告资格问题 行政公益诉讼原告资格，是行政诉讼公益诉讼的核心问题，他的发展必然会推动行政公益诉讼制度的发展。所以，建立真正意义上的行政公益诉讼，其主要内容和关键之处就在于对行政公益诉讼原告资格认定标准的设定，这将直接关系到整个行政公益诉讼制度能否最终得到确立。为此，我国许多学者站在比较法的角度提出借鉴国外的他山之石，利用国外的行政公益诉讼原告资格理论来建立我国的行政公益诉讼制度。笔者在研读了华东政法大学朱应平教授所着《澳大利亚行政公益诉讼原告资格探析》一文后，认为在行政公益诉讼原告资格理论方面，并非他山之石一定能攻玉，国外关于个人及社会团体能成为行政公益诉讼原告资格的理论就不能在我国适用，为此笔者检察机关作为我国行政公益诉讼唯一原告的主张。 随着我国法制建设的不断完善，建立健全公益诉讼制度，已是法制建设的必然趋势。近几年，行政公益诉讼已受到学术界的普遍关注，有关行政公益诉讼的文章也常见于许多期刊杂志，特别是修正后的民事诉讼法确立了民事公益诉讼制度，更是掀起了行政公益诉讼的讨论高潮。很多学者站在比较法的角度，认为许多外国行政公益诉讼中关于原告资格的理论可以适用于我国行政公益诉讼，笔者最近有幸拜读了华东政法大学朱应平教授所着《澳大利亚行政公益诉讼原告资格探析》一文，该文对澳大利亚行政公益诉讼的原告资格进行了全面分析，详细列举了澳大利亚行政公益诉讼原告资格有总检察长、个人和社会团体三种类型，朱教授同样认为澳大利亚行政公益诉讼原告资格的做法值得我国借鉴。但笔者认为：他山之石未必能攻玉，国外行政公益诉讼的原告未必能全部为我国借鉴，并以此确立我国行政公益诉讼的原告也可以有检察长、个人和社会团体三种类型。为此笔者试从行政公益诉讼及原告资格的概念入手，分析国外检察长、个人和社会团体三种类型在我国的不可行性，进而提出检察机关作为我国行政公益诉讼唯一原告的理论，以求教于各位行家。 一、行政公益诉讼及原告资格的概念分析 澳大利亚公益诉讼的含义。学界和实务界对“公益诉讼”概念也有不同理解。澳大利亚法律改革委员会指出：“法院喜欢让该定义处于开放状态，且以每个案件的背景情况为基础对公益问题做出决定。但是法院在关于如何探讨该问题上提供了某些指导。一种获得广泛认同的方法是，看该案件是否影响共同体或该

民事起诉状(提起公益诉讼用)

民事起诉状 原告：×××，住所地……。 法定代表人/主要负责人：×××，……(写明职务)，联系方式：……。 委托诉讼代理人：×××，……。 被告：黎XX，男，生于1970年11月12日，汉族，城镇居民，住XX县XX镇XX路XX号4楼5号，身份证号码： XXXXXX19701112XXXX，电话号码：1898033XXXX。 诉讼请求： …… 事实和理由： ……(写明原告具备提起公益诉讼主体资格以及其他事实和理由)。 证据和证据来源，证人姓名和住所： …… 此致 ××××人民法院 附：本起诉状副本×份 起诉人(公章和签名) ××××年××月××日

【说明】 1．本样式根据《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第五十五条、第一百二十一条以及《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民事诉讼法〉的解释》第二百八十四条等制定，供法律规定的机关和有关组织，向人民法院提起公益诉讼用。2．提起环境民事公益诉讼应当提交下列材料：(一)符合民事诉讼法第一百二十一条规定的起诉状，并按照被告人数提出副本；(二)被告的行为已经损害社会公共利益或者具有损害社会公共利益重大风险的初步证明材料；(三)社会组织提起诉讼的，应当提交社会组织登记证书、章程、起诉前连续五年的年度工作报告书或者年检报告书，以及由其法定代表人或者主要负责人签字并加盖公章的无违法记录的声明。3．提起消费民事公益诉讼应当提交下列材料：(一)符合民事诉讼法第一百二十一条规定的起诉状，并按照被告人数提交副本；(二)被告的行为侵害众多不特定消费者合法权益或者具有危及消费者人身、财产安全危险等损害社会公共利益的初步证据；(三)消费者组织就涉诉事项已按照消费者权益保护法第三十七条第四项或者第五项的规定履行公益性职责的证明材料。

大学毕业论文---软件专业外文文献中英文翻译

软件专业毕业论文外文文献中英文翻译 Object landscapes and lifetimes Tech nically, OOP is just about abstract data typing, in herita nee, and polymorphism, but other issues can be at least as importa nt. The rema in der of this sect ion will cover these issues. One of the most importa nt factors is the way objects are created and destroyed. Where is the data for an object and how is the lifetime of the object con trolled? There are differe nt philosophies at work here. C++ takes the approach that con trol of efficie ncy is the most importa nt issue, so it gives the programmer a choice. For maximum run-time speed, the storage and lifetime can be determined while the program is being written, by placing the objects on the stack (these are sometimes called automatic or scoped variables) or in the static storage area. This places a priority on the speed of storage allocatio n and release, and con trol of these can be very valuable in some situati ons. However, you sacrifice flexibility because you must know the exact qua ntity, lifetime, and type of objects while you're writing the program. If you are trying to solve a more general problem such as computer-aided desig n, warehouse man ageme nt, or air-traffic con trol, this is too restrictive. The sec ond approach is to create objects dyn amically in a pool of memory called the heap. In this approach, you don't know un til run-time how many objects you n eed, what their lifetime is, or what their exact type is. Those are determined at the spur of the moment while the program is runnin g. If you n eed a new object, you simply make it on the heap at the point that you n eed it. Because the storage is man aged dyn amically, at run-time, the amount of time required to allocate storage on the heap is sig ni fica ntly Ion ger tha n the time to create storage on the stack. (Creat ing storage on the stack is ofte n a si ngle assembly in structio n to move the stack poin ter dow n, and ano ther to move it back up.) The dyn amic approach makes the gen erally logical assumpti on that objects tend to be complicated, so the extra overhead of finding storage and releas ing that storage will not have an importa nt impact on the creati on of an object .In additi on, the greater flexibility is esse ntial to solve the gen eral program ming problem. Java uses the sec ond approach, exclusive". Every time you want to create an object, you use the new keyword to build a dyn amic in sta nee of that object. There's ano ther issue, however, and that's the lifetime of an object. With Ian guages that allow objects to be created on the stack, the compiler determines how long the object lasts and can automatically destroy it. However, if you create it on the heap the compiler has no kno wledge of its lifetime. In a Ianguage like C++, you must determine programmatically when to destroy the

试论环境公益诉讼适格原告

第23卷第4期河北法学 Vol .23,No.42005年4月 H ebei Law Science Apr .,2005 试论环境公益诉讼适格原告 郭英华,李庆华 收稿日期:2004211208 作者简介:郭英华(19652),女,江苏南京人,河海大学法律系副教授,江苏省南京市人民法院副院长,研究方向:民商法学、环境与资源保护 法学; 李庆华(19792),女,江苏徐州人,河海大学2003级环境与资源保护法学硕士研究生,研究方向:环境与资源保护法学。 (河海大学法律系,江苏南京210098) 摘　要:环境公益诉讼是一种新型的诉讼。它突破了传统诉讼中对原告资格的限制,为世界多数国家所采纳。而我国现 行的诉讼法却对原告资格进行了较多的限制,阻碍了环境诉讼和环境保护。从理论和司法实践两方面分析了在我国扩大原告资格的依据,将直接受害人、社会一般公众、社会组织、检察机关和后代人列为环境公益诉讼的适格原告。 关键词:公益诉讼;环境公益诉讼;适格原告 中图分类号:DF468 文献标识码:A 文章编号:100223933(2005)0420079204 On Q ualified Plaintiff in the E nvironmental Suit of the Public Benefit G UO Y ing 2hua ,LI Qing 2hua (Law Department ,H ohai University ,Nanjing 210098China ) Abstract :The environmental suit of the public benefit ,adopted by m ost countries in the w orld is a new kind of suit ,which breaks though the limit on plaintiff quality in the traditional suits.But the situation of m ore limits on plaintiff quality in Chinese suits laws ,blocks the development of environmental suit and environmental protection in our country.This article analyses the causes of broadening the scope of plaintiff in the tw o aspects of the theories and judicial practice.The qualified plaintiff includes direct vic 2tims ,comm on citizens ,s ocial organizations ,procuratorate and descendants. K ey w ords :suit of public benefit ;the environmental suit of the public benefit ;qualified plaintiff 目前,由于我国经济的快速发展,污染环境和破坏生态的现象十分严重,环境侵权问题也日益凸显。作为一种特殊的诉讼,环境诉讼是解决环境侵权的一个重要途径。但是由于传统诉讼法将提起诉讼的主体严格限制在与案件有直接利害关系的人和受到具体行政行为侵害的相对人之上,不可避免地束缚了环境诉讼的发展,无法应对日趋严重的环境违法行为。因此,要对传统诉讼法进行突破,建立环境公益诉讼,扩大诉讼的适格原告范围,以应对日益增多的环境纠纷处理的需要。 一、公益诉讼与环境公益诉讼 公益诉讼是相对于私益诉讼而言的。它起源于罗马法。在古罗马,法分为公法和私法,诉讼也因此分为“公诉”和“私诉”两种,公诉是对有关国家利益案件的审查,私诉是根据个人的申诉对有关个人案件的审查。意大利罗马法学者彼德罗?彭梵得在考察了古罗马的法律后认为:“为维护公共利益而设置的罚金诉讼为民众诉讼(即公益诉讼—笔者注),任何市民都有权提起它。受到非法的行为损害(即 便只是私人利益受损)的人或被公众认为适宜起诉的人员优先权[1]。从这个定义我们可以看出,在公益诉讼中,原告可以是不特定的人,既可以是无利害关系人,也可以是有利害关系人。如果原告有多人,由法官选择的适宜人作原告。原告起诉的目的不是为了自己的利益,而是为了维护社会公益、法律的尊严及社会公正。他所起诉的违法行为范围也比较广泛,既有民事侵权行为,也有违法行为和犯罪行为。公益诉讼的作用是对国家机关执法的补充,而不是取代[2]。通过公益诉讼,可以使公民、组织等都参与到与违法行为做斗争的行列中来,以维护法治的权威和社会秩序,是现代法治国家的基本要求。 公益诉讼所针对的一般是“公害”,如垄断、不正当竞争、价格违法、国有资产的流失、环境污染等。这些公害不仅威胁到某一个人,更是对社会公共利益的损害。目前,比较突出的就是环境污染和破坏。河流的污染、酸雨的泛滥、水土的流失等现象带来了多人的健康受损、财产破坏,因此引发了环境公益诉讼。