Research on the Environmental Public Interest …
655
governance cost, but the multiples here are not punitive compensation but represent
the ceiling and floor of the damage amount. Therefore, we may consider applying
punitive compensation to actors who intentionally damage or let others damage the
environment to further deter future environment damages. Next, we should demonstrate the feasibility of punitive compensation in EPIL, its applicable conditions and
how to calculate the penalty amount.
Fifth, we should introduce new ways of engaging the public to truly implement the
democratic concept of “co-governance of public interest for all.” Public engagement
embodies the modern concept of democratic public interest. Its breadth and depth
should both be considered. It is necessary to ensure the breadth of public engagement,
which can be resolved through extensive public outreach. What’s more important is
its intensity and depth, which is determined by the professionalism required in EPIL.
For one thing, we can effectively apply the expert witness system according to the
Civil Procedure Law, value the opinions of expert witnesses, and realize checks and
balances on appraisal opinions, to restrain the decisive role of appraisal opinions in
the court judgment and thus ensure the overall fairness of the judgment. Meanwhile
the active use of the expert witness system is itself an effective means to ensure
deep public engagement in EPIL. For another, we should continue to expand the
coverage of public announcements. In addition to mediation, we can make public
the restoration plan, the time limit and means for restoring the original state or eliminating the danger and solicit public opinions, especially expert opinions. We should
issue more announcements and notices targeting residents living in damaged areas
and specialized agencies. We should purposefully establish contacts with residents
and institutions in the affected areas, to solicit their support and suggestions on the
prevention of damage, the determination of the restoration plan and the amount of
damage compensation, etc., for scientific decision-making. The objection procedure
after the announcement is issued should be introduced. For example, a restricted
number (such as three or more) of ordinary people may jointly file the objection in
writing, with reasons attached; and it should stipulate the legal consequences that
may arise when the conditions are not met.
655
governance cost, but the multiples here are not punitive compensation but represent
the ceiling and floor of the damage amount. Therefore, we may consider applying
punitive compensation to actors who intentionally damage or let others damage the
environment to further deter future environment damages. Next, we should demonstrate the feasibility of punitive compensation in EPIL, its applicable conditions and
how to calculate the penalty amount.
Fifth, we should introduce new ways of engaging the public to truly implement the
democratic concept of “co-governance of public interest for all.” Public engagement
embodies the modern concept of democratic public interest. Its breadth and depth
should both be considered. It is necessary to ensure the breadth of public engagement,
which can be resolved through extensive public outreach. What’s more important is
its intensity and depth, which is determined by the professionalism required in EPIL.
For one thing, we can effectively apply the expert witness system according to the
Civil Procedure Law, value the opinions of expert witnesses, and realize checks and
balances on appraisal opinions, to restrain the decisive role of appraisal opinions in
the court judgment and thus ensure the overall fairness of the judgment. Meanwhile
the active use of the expert witness system is itself an effective means to ensure
deep public engagement in EPIL. For another, we should continue to expand the
coverage of public announcements. In addition to mediation, we can make public
the restoration plan, the time limit and means for restoring the original state or eliminating the danger and solicit public opinions, especially expert opinions. We should
issue more announcements and notices targeting residents living in damaged areas
and specialized agencies. We should purposefully establish contacts with residents
and institutions in the affected areas, to solicit their support and suggestions on the
prevention of damage, the determination of the restoration plan and the amount of
damage compensation, etc., for scientific decision-making. The objection procedure
after the announcement is issued should be introduced. For example, a restricted
number (such as three or more) of ordinary people may jointly file the objection in
writing, with reasons attached; and it should stipulate the legal consequences that
may arise when the conditions are not met.