Research On Plaintiff Qualification Of Environmental Public Interest Litigation

Environmental public interest litigation targets environmental violations in order to protect the public interest of the environment. The Chinese public interest litigation system was established in 2012. Later, in 2014, the revised Environmental Protection Law refined it further. Nevertheless, compared to that of other countries it is still in an initial stage and needs improvement. The litigation is initiated by a complainant. Refining the provision of the rights of the complainant in the legislation can greatly contribute to the development of this system, especially in its practical implication. The clear definition of the complainant determines which complainant has the rights to start a lawsuit, and who can sue as plaintiff.Due to the increasing seriousness of environmental pollution in China, there is a need to increase awareness of environmental protection. The constraints of the complainant in environmental litigation should be broadened adequately. Giving rights to more citizens to seek legal support is an absolute necessity. Citizens should be encouraged to protect the environment and urged to take social responsibility. The theoretical basics underlying the expansion of the spectrum of a plaintiff are: theory of fiduciary litigation, environmental rights theory and the principles of public participation. Public interest litigation originates from ancient Rome, while the modern lawsuit is from the United States of America. This system has been introduced to several countries as a judicial method of environmental protection,although the definition and description of the plaintiff vary in the legislation of different countries. In China the system of environmental public interest litigation is still in a premature stage, and there are several deficiencies in its practical application.The main content of this paper is to propose a method to improve the definition and description of the plaintiff in environmental public interest litigation based on lessons drawn from foreign examples.In the United States of America the existence of "factual damages" is the eligible criterion for suing as plaintiff. There are no restrictions for different kinds of plaintiffs,as long as "factual damages" are proven the lawsuit can begin. It is possible to sue for actual and non-pecuniary damages as well. In China it is possible for citizens to start public interest litigation, however, in order to avoid the frequent occurrence of indiscriminate lawsuits, complainants should be restricted to the ones with proven"factual damages". In India all citizens have the right to initiate environmental public interest litigation. The conditions of India and China are rather similar, as both are developing countries with a large population and serious pollution. Therefore the judicial practice of environmental public interest litigation of India can be used as a more relevant example, where judicial activism greatly contributes towards the efficiency of such legal proceedings. The regulations of Germany and China are fairly similar, with the exception of the fact that in China it is highly unlikely for any administrative organisation to be allowed to initiate a public interest lawsuit, because in such a case it might lead to a conflict of interest, and the entire lawsuit might become its way to evade legal responsibility. Due to the special social structure of China, villagers' committees are legally allowed to represent a civil organization, and thus it should have the rights to initiate a public interest lawsuit as plaintiff.Creating multiple categories of complainants can encourage an increasing number of people to participate in environmental protection, and the better to fulfill their social responsibilities. However to a certain extent, conflict of rights is unavoidable. The diversification of complainants should not be allowed to encumber the legal proceedings. Besides broadening the spectrum of a plaintiff, it is also necessary to establish a well-functioning dispute settlement system in order to make litigations proceed with greater success.