| As China’s public interest litigation pilot work continues to step foreward,environmental administrative public interest litigation has developed significantly and gained some experience in the process of national legal governance.However,there are still many problems in the process with developing,especially in the allocation of the burden of proof,which has shown a lack of practice and theory.The prosecution,as the plaintiff in a lawsuit,bears the most important burden of proof.However,as a plaintiff,the procuratorial authorities are in a weaker position than ordinary administrative litigants,and the procuratorial authorities themselves have strong litigation powers to exercise supervision on behalf of the state.From the perspective of the functional positioning of the environmental administrative public interest litigation system,a reasonable allocation of the burden of proof should be adhered to,with the procuratorial authorities bearing the burden of proof in respect of the facts of the procedural aspects.Secondly,the rules on the allocation of the burden of proof to administrative organs should be refined by distinguishing between the types of acts of administrative organs.When the administrative organ does not act,the proportional relationship between the administrative organ and the consequences of damage lacks clear boundaries.The administrative organ as a statutory administrative organ of environmental public interest behavior,there will be administrative organs in accordance with the law resulting in the loss of environmental public interest and administrative acts of illegal exercise of environmental damage in two situations.Whether or not as the standard of burden of proof,should not consistently use the standard of proof,but should be judged according to the specific circumstances.Based on the analysis of the above issues,the author provides specific measures to improve the proper implementation and enforcement of the environmental administrative public interest litigation system. |