| In the judicial practice of environmental administrative public interest litigation,the administration "failure to perform duties according to law" is the main cause for the prosecution to bring the case to court.Therefore,the performance judgment with the main content of "order administrative organs to perform supervision duties" has become the most frequently applied judgment type in environmental administrative public interest litigation.Since the system has only been in operation for six years since its formal establishment,the implementation details of the system are not perfect,there are many vague provisions on the performance judgments in legal and judicial interpretations,and the theoretical circle has few studies on the application of performance judgments in environmental administrative public interest litigation.All these factors together lead to many problems to the performance judgments.This paper reviews 163 judgment documents of environmental administrative public interest litigation from 2020 to 2022.Based on theoretical research on the system,combined with judicial cases,from the four aspects of the identification of "not performing duties according to law",the form of judgment,the content of judgment,and the supervision of execution of judgment,this paper probes into the judicial practice of environmental administrative public interest litigation.Through the research and analysis of the typical cases of performance judgment,the following problems exist in the current judicial practice: first,the identification standard of "not performing duties according to law" is not clear,which leads to the administrative organ in a completely disadvantageous position in litigation.As long as it is prosecuted by the procuratorial organ,it will almost always lose the case no matter what the reason of defense is;second,the form of the judgment is unreasonable,and the execution of the judgment and the confirmation of the illegal judgment are applicable at the same time,which does not comply with the relevant provisions of the administrative procedure law on the application of different types of judgment;third,the content of the judgment of performance is too principled and general,and a large part of the judgment does not specify the time limit of performance and performance standards,so it is doubtful whether the lawsuit can produce substantive effect;fourth,the laws and regulations on how to supervise the execution of administrative organs after the judgment are not perfect,and the supervision of the execution after the judgment is weak.The existence of these problems not only violates the unity of judicial application,but also affects the function of environmental administrative public interest litigation system.In order to solve the above problems,this paper puts forward the corresponding suggestions: first,the three steps under the standard of behavior to determine whether the administrative organ "performs its duties according to law",so as to make the process and result of litigation more scientific and reasonable;second,local courts set up an exchange platform for the trial of environmental administrative public interest litigation,constantly summarize trial experience,and gradually form a unified judgment concept;third,the court should give full play to the initiative of environmental justice,appropriate and clear implementation of the content of the judgment;fourth,through the improvement of the legal provisions of enforcement supervision and the linkage of "legal prosecutors and banks" to form a joint force of enforcement supervision,walk the "last mile" of litigation.It is believed that with the continuous improvement of this system,it will play a greater value function in promoting the protection of environmental public interests. |
