| 摘要: |
| 生态环境损害赔偿磋商制度构建了“赔偿权利人与赔偿义务人进行平等协商后申请司法确认”的创新治理模式,但其内部结构的复杂性引发理论认知偏差与实践运行障碍,根源在于磋商行为的法律性质未得到法理上的重视与清晰界定。磋商行为主观上缺乏为赔偿义务人直接设定权利义务的意思表示,客观上亦不能直接产生具有约束力的法律效果,其作用仅限于推动形成事实层面的合意,故在性质上应归于行政事实行为。立足于新时代生态文明建设与环境治理体系现代化要求,有关磋商行为的规范表达在已经颁布的《生态环境法典》中仍显隐晦,其行政事实行为的属性应在后续司法解释或配套规定中得到充分体现。具体而言,制度完善应着力实现以下三方面的供给:一是要以程序正当性为刚性约束,细化磋商行为的内部规则,确保合意真实且具备公共理性；二是要实现不同环境治理手段之间的流畅衔接,避免行政恣意与资源浪费；三是以司法谦抑为审查原则,构建以自愿申请前置、以程序与内容合法性为审查核心的司法确认专门规则。 |
| 关键词: 生态环境损害赔偿 磋商行为 行政事实行为 《生态环境法典》 |
| DOI：10.13216/j.cnki.upcjess.2026.02.0004 |
| 分类号:D923;D922.68 |
| 基金项目:山东省社会科学规划研究项目(25CFXJ10) |
|
| Nature Identification of Ecological and Environmental Damage Compensation Consultations and Corresponding Responses in the Code |
|
QIN Yong, ZHANG Wenchao
|
|
(School of Humanities and Law, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China)
|
| Abstract: |
| The consultation system for ecological and environmental damage compensation has established an innovative governance model in which the compensation claimant and the obligor engaged in equal consultations before applying for judicial confirmation. However, the complexity of its internal structure has given rise to theoretical misunderstandings and practical operational obstacles, rooted in the lack of doctrinal attention and clear delineation of the legal nature of the consultation behavior. Although consultations exhibit characteristics of negotiations, it is not homogeneous with civil acts founded on the principle of autonomy of will. Similarly, often led by administrative authorities, it differs from administrative adjudication or consensual administrative acts, which create legal relationships directly through the dispositive expressions of will by administrative entities. In essence, the consultation process subjectively lacks the intent to directly confer rights and obligations for the compensation obligor, and objectively fails to directly produce legally binding effects. Its function is limited to facilitating factual agreement, and therefore, its legal nature should be classified as an administrative factual act. Given the requirements of ecological civilization construction and the modernization of the environmental governance system in the new era, the normative expression of consultation acts remains implicit in the newly promulgated Ecological and Environmental Code. The administrative factual acts should be fully reflected in subsequent judicial interpretations or supporting regulations. Specifically, institutional improvements should target the following three core objectives. Firstly, procedural fairness should be established as a mandatory constraint with detailed internal rules of consultation acts to ensure genuine agreements and public rationality. Secondly, coordination among diverse environmental governance measures should be optimized to prevent resource inefficiency. Thirdly, judicial review should adhere to the principle of restraint, prioritizing voluntary application while focusing on both procedural and substantive legality in the conformation process. |
| Key words: ecological and environmental damage compensation consultations administrative factual act the Ecological and Environmental Code |
