650
Z. Wu
its purpose and scope of business include the maintenance of environmental public
interest, whether it is actually engaged in environmental protection activities, and
whether the environmental public interest it tries to safeguard is related to its purpose
and scope of business. This was the first time the court used specific cases to clarify
who can file EPIL at the judicial level, which has promoted the development of the
EPIL system, and played an important guiding and exemplary role in the trial of civil
EPIL cases.
Fourth, by hearing EPIL cases in accordance with the law, the people’s courts
continuously enrich and diversify the content and channels of public engagement. In the case of Changzhou Environmental Public Interest Association vs. Chu
Weiqing and Changzhou Boshi’er Material Recycling Co., Ltd., the court demanded
the assessment company to produce three environmental restoration plans, then
published them around the contaminated site, and collect public opinions on them
by distributing questionnaires on the spot. The final environmental restoration plan
was chosen with the public opinion as an important reference and based on the
case situation. In the case of the Lianyungang District People’s Procuratorate of
Lianyungang City vs. Yin Baoshan et al. for illegal fishing of aquatic products, the
court disclosed the ecological restoration plan to the public through local media, the
court’s official account on Weibo and WeChat, solicited public opinions extensively,
and obtained proof of the rationality of the restoration plan issued by relevant functional departments, creating a new mechanism for guiding the public to participate
in environmental justice.
Fifth, by hearing EPIL cases in accordance with the law, the people’s courts have
more effectively prioritized protection. As Professor Lv Zhongmei said, “Environmental restoration requires continuous investment and inspection, which is difficult
for the court to follow up, monitor and enforce for a long time.” In the Taizhou
EPIL case, the court of second instance partially changed the payment method of
environmental restoration costs, allowed partial deferral and conditional deduction,
guided and encouraged the enterprise concerned to actively upgrade technologies
for environmental protection, and thus from the source reduce the possibility of
environmental pollution. This practice conformed to the principles proposed in the
Environmental Protection Law of focusing on prevention and combining prevention
with control, and generated judicial, social, and environmental benefits at the same
time. It can be regarded as an original way of assuming environmental tort liabilities,
and is the fruit of judicial wisdom.
Z. Wu
its purpose and scope of business include the maintenance of environmental public
interest, whether it is actually engaged in environmental protection activities, and
whether the environmental public interest it tries to safeguard is related to its purpose
and scope of business. This was the first time the court used specific cases to clarify
who can file EPIL at the judicial level, which has promoted the development of the
EPIL system, and played an important guiding and exemplary role in the trial of civil
EPIL cases.
Fourth, by hearing EPIL cases in accordance with the law, the people’s courts
continuously enrich and diversify the content and channels of public engagement. In the case of Changzhou Environmental Public Interest Association vs. Chu
Weiqing and Changzhou Boshi’er Material Recycling Co., Ltd., the court demanded
the assessment company to produce three environmental restoration plans, then
published them around the contaminated site, and collect public opinions on them
by distributing questionnaires on the spot. The final environmental restoration plan
was chosen with the public opinion as an important reference and based on the
case situation. In the case of the Lianyungang District People’s Procuratorate of
Lianyungang City vs. Yin Baoshan et al. for illegal fishing of aquatic products, the
court disclosed the ecological restoration plan to the public through local media, the
court’s official account on Weibo and WeChat, solicited public opinions extensively,
and obtained proof of the rationality of the restoration plan issued by relevant functional departments, creating a new mechanism for guiding the public to participate
in environmental justice.
Fifth, by hearing EPIL cases in accordance with the law, the people’s courts have
more effectively prioritized protection. As Professor Lv Zhongmei said, “Environmental restoration requires continuous investment and inspection, which is difficult
for the court to follow up, monitor and enforce for a long time.” In the Taizhou
EPIL case, the court of second instance partially changed the payment method of
environmental restoration costs, allowed partial deferral and conditional deduction,
guided and encouraged the enterprise concerned to actively upgrade technologies
for environmental protection, and thus from the source reduce the possibility of
environmental pollution. This practice conformed to the principles proposed in the
Environmental Protection Law of focusing on prevention and combining prevention
with control, and generated judicial, social, and environmental benefits at the same
time. It can be regarded as an original way of assuming environmental tort liabilities,
and is the fruit of judicial wisdom.