On The Systematic Understanding Of "Serious Environmental Pollution" In Judicial Interpretations

Article 46 of the Amendment to the Criminal Law of the People ’s Republic of China（VIII）of 25 February 2011（hereinafter referred to as the ’ Criminal Amendment（VIII）’）amended the ’ crime of major environmental pollution accidents ’ stipulated in Article 338 of the 1997 Criminal Law and changed it to the ’crime of environmental pollution ’.The original provisions of the crime of major environmental pollution accidents ’ cause of major environmental pollution accidents,resulting in significant losses of public and private property or serious consequences of personal injury and death ’,changed to ’ serious pollution of the environment ’,no longer require ’ cause of serious consequences ’ of the conditions of criminalization,this is the first ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ in the criminal legislation of environmental crime.However,due to the change of the constitutive requirements of the crime from the original ’ personal property loss ’ to the relatively vague standard ’serious pollution of the environment ’,it has brought many disputes and differences to the identification of the crime of environmental pollution.In June 2013 and November 2016,the Supreme Law and the Supreme People ’ s Procuratorate revised and issued the ’ Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Criminal Cases of Environmental Pollution ’（hereinafter referred to as the ’Interpretation of Environmental Pollution ’ in 2013 and the ’ Interpretation of Environmental Pollution ’ in 2016）,in which the ’ Severely Polluted Environment ’ is specifically set three standards : behavior standards,result standards and blocking standards.This reflects the two changes of the concept of environmental pollution control in China : the position of environmental pollution control changed from anthropocentrism to eco-centrism,and the idea of environmental pollution control changed from punishment to prevention.The 2013 ’ environmental pollution interpretation ’ is based on the inheritance of the 2006 judicial interpretation of the crime of major environmental pollution accidents,only 1-5 of the 14 cases of ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ are new provisions for the ’ standard of conduct ’,in addition to the hybridity of the 2006 judicial interpretation of the ’ result standard ’ of ’ public and private property damage or personal casualty results ’.The 2016 ’Environmental Pollution Explanation ’ added4 cases on the basis of the 14 specific cases specified in 2013,with a total of 18 ’serious environmental pollution ’ specific manifestations.But,the 2016 ’environmental pollution interpretation ’ is a comprehensive inheritance of the 2013 ’environmental pollution interpretation ’,so it also retains the issue of identifying ’serious environmental pollution ’.That is,’ confusion of conviction standard : crossidentification of behavior standard and result standard ’,’ deviation from the nature of natural crime : mixed natural crime and statutory crime ’,’ staggered application of different results : mixed direct and indirect results ’.All these practical difficulties are rooted in the judicial interpretation of the ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ in the protection of legal interests of the existence of hierarchical confusion,that is,environmental legal interests and human legal interests are simply juxtaposed,ignoring the independence of environmental legal interests and the hierarchical relationship with the protection of human legal interests,which leads to the judicial interpretation of the ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ in the real dilemma of mixed attributes,wide scope and confusion.It can be said that the judicial interpretation of ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ with mixed attributes,wide scope and chaotic level is the culprit of great divergence and confusion in judicial practice and theoretical circles.Therefore,if we do not solve the problems existing in the judicial interpretation of ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ it is obviously of no significance to continue ’ expressing one’s own opinions ’ on the basis of the existing judicial interpretation of ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ which has mixed attributes,too wide scope and disordered levels,and will also cause the confusion of talking to oneself and sticking to one’s own words.Therefore,in view of the problems existing in the judicial interpretation of ’serious pollution of the environment ’,such as mixed attributes,wide scope and chaotic level,we should systematically sort out and classify the diversified provisions of the judicial interpretation of ’ serious pollution of the environment ’ on the basis of analyzing the causes and guided by the new concept of legal interests.First of all,we should clarify the independent protection status of environmental legal interests and the hierarchical relationship between environmental legal interests and human legal interests.We should limit the standard of conviction of the judicial interpretation of“ serious environmental pollution ” to the infringement of “ environmental legal interests,” and exclude the content reflecting human legal interests from the threshold of conviction of the crime of environmental pollution.Secondly,’ serious pollution of the environment ’ should be divided into the following specific types : First,the behavior standard is divided into the basic crime,the result standard is divided into the aggravated consequential offense.Second,the natural crime is divided into the basic crime,and the statutory crime is an aggravating circumstance at the second sentencing level.Third,the direct result of ecological environment damage is divided into the second grade of aggravation after the basic crime of ’ behavior standard ’,and the indirect result of personal and property interests damage is divided into the third grade of aggravation after the basic crime of ’ behavior standard ’.