【作者】 徐石江；

【导师】 张怡；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 经济法学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 经济法是保护公共经济利益的实体法，公益诉讼制度是保护公共利益的特殊程序法，二者具有制度价值上的契合性。可诉性是法律规范的普遍特征。经济法的三大主要组成部分——市场规制法、经济监管法和宏观调控法，都无一例外地应当具有可诉性。由于传统的三大诉讼制度对于经济法纠纷的解决存在权利救济上的非经济性和操作上的非科学性。因此，经济法的实现应当寻求新的诉讼程序法。于是，经济公益诉讼制度就应运而生了。传统诉讼制度在保护个人利益和国家利益方面发挥了重要作用，但在保护公共利益方面却困难重重。经过学者们的长期研究，公益诉讼虽然已获得了理论上的自洽性，但要想真正发挥其应有的制度功效，解决公益普遍受漠视及司法保护不力的现实问题，必须要清醒认识到公益普遍受侵害的原因是多方面的，既有公民、法人、社会组织的侵权行为，更有行政机关的渎职滥权行为，故在公益司法保护上必须坚持综合审理与能动司法理念，这就必然要求打破传统诉讼类型的划分方式。因此，笔者反对把公益诉讼进行民事公益诉讼、行政公益诉讼的分类方法，而应当从社会生活的不同领域分为经济领域公益诉讼、政治领域公益诉讼和社会领域公益诉讼，其中，经济公益诉讼显然属于经济领域公益诉讼，并且在我国是最迫切需要开展的公益诉讼类型，揉合了学界所主张的民事公益诉讼与行政公益诉讼的内容，也包含了证券欺诈等“准公益诉讼”类型。在经济公益诉讼制度构建时，要充分认识到公益诉讼案件的起诉、审理到执行的各个阶段的特殊性及其与传统诉讼方式的不兼容性，这也是我国经济公益诉讼虽已付诸实践但实施效果并不理想的原因所在。因此，对经济公益诉讼的实施困境与出路进行分析与探索是经济公益诉讼从理论走向实践的必由之路。本文的研究目的就是通过对经济公益诉讼实施困境与出路的分析，进而形成有利于经济公益诉讼实施的激励机制。全文共分七章。第一章主要论述经济法与经济公益诉讼的关系。首先论述了经济法的产生背景及其公共利益本位，然后分析了诉讼制度的世界发展趋势：诉讼制度的目的从保护个人利益到维护公共利益转变，原告诉之利益从直接利害关系到间接利害关系变迁，以及公益诉讼产生的历史必然。公益诉讼的分类在理论上虽然尚未统一，但为实现保护公共利益的目的，公益诉讼不应沿袭私权保护的法律传统分类方法，而应当根据社会发展各领域矛盾状况进行研究和实践。经济公益诉讼正是适应我国经济发展过程中的突出矛盾和问题而产生的。经济法与经济公益诉讼不仅具有发展历程上的契合性，而且具有利益本位上的一致性。经济公益诉讼是经济法可诉性的重要保障和实现方式。经济公益诉讼的主要类型在各国司法实践中差异较大，其中的原因除了法律文化方面的差异外，主要缘起于各国经济发展不同阶段所表现出的矛盾形式和紧迫性方面的不同。我国现阶段的经济公益诉讼应当主要包括纳税人诉讼、政府采购公益诉讼、消费者权益保护与产品质量公益诉讼、环境保护公益诉讼、反垄断与反不正当竞争公益诉讼、证券欺诈公益诉讼、宏观调控公益诉讼等几种典型形式。第二章阐述我国建立经济公益诉讼制度的必要性与现实障碍。随着我国经济发展和改革开放逐步深入，某些深层次矛盾日益显露出来，公共经济利益受侵犯的现象也越来越明显：消费侵权、假冒伪劣商品、税款滥用、国资流失、市场监管泛力、宏观调控失范、环境污染严重等等。然而，无论是行政执法，还是现有的诉讼体制，都无法为经济公益提供充分有效的法律保护。另外，和谐社会的建设目标及司法公开与司法民主政策的落实也要求法院对现有的诉讼体制与诉讼模式有所突破。因此，构建体现公众参与的经济公益诉讼制度不仅是经济发展的迫切需要，也是法院自身改革的必由之路。但不可避免的是，经济公益诉讼制度要全面付诸实践必然会受到观念与制度方面的双重阻碍。社会上公共利益最大理念的缺失、实务界缺乏法社会学理论及能动司法理念的指导、传统诉讼模式所带来根深蒂固的影响等，构成了经济公益诉讼实施的观念障碍。传统诉讼分工体制、法院内部工作机制及司法监督体制则构成了经济公益诉讼实施的直接制度障碍。同时，我国司法权威严重不足、中介组织存在的功能性缺陷也是经济公益诉讼制度实施不得不考虑并加以克服的重大阻碍。第三章对国外及台湾地区经济公益诉讼的理论与实践进行评析。在古罗马，就有公益诉讼与私益诉讼之分，公益诉讼的实质就是原告以个人名义保护公共利益，当然包含了本文所论及的经济公益诉讼。美国的集团诉讼特别是证券欺诈集团诉讼，体现了经济公益诉讼的本质特征。美国还存在环境公益诉讼、反垄断公益诉讼、告发人诉讼、纳税人诉讼等经济公益诉讼形态。其他国家及我国台湾地区，也存在各种形式的经济公益诉讼。这些公益诉讼理念与实践值得我国借鉴，特别是印度的书信管辖权制度及法院保护公益方面的能动司法理念，尤其值得我国学习。第四章主要介绍了我国现阶段已经或急需开展的几种经济公益诉讼典型形态：纳税人诉讼、政府采购公益诉讼、消费者权益保护与产品质量公益诉讼、证券欺诈公益诉讼、环境保护公益诉讼、反垄断与不正当竞争公益诉讼及宏观调控公益诉讼。这部分内容主要以案例分析为基础，结合国内外的实践经验，阐述了这几种公益诉讼在我国开展的必要性、正当性与可行性，一方面印证了诉讼目的与诉之利益理论的发展在经济公益诉讼中的体现，另一方面结合诉讼过程中存在的问题和症结对完善相关公益诉讼程序提出了一些具体建议和要求。第五章论述了经济公益诉讼制度实施中的起诉激励措施。起诉是诉讼程序的基础性阶段，如何对起诉主体进行激励以推动公益诉讼的实施，一直是学界关注的热点和重点。经济公益诉讼应当实行全面的起诉激励机制，包括起诉主体类型与序位的明晰化、立案范围与标准的公开化、物质激励措施、法院指导制度等，其中的物质激励措施是最受关注的激励方式。应当建立以中介组织为主、个人和检察机关为辅的起诉主体制度，使公益诉讼成为中介组织的重要业务和收入来源，从而使经济公益诉讼的推动实施与中介组织的发展壮大之间形成良性互动。激励资金来源应当主要依靠胜诉提成制度以及通过发行法律彩票募集激励基金，为激励资金提供充分的法律保障。此外，经济公益案件的起诉方式应当较传统诉讼模式放宽，可以采纳印度的书信管辖权制度，增强法院受理公益案件的能动性。诉讼费用方面广泛实行减、免、缓制度，切实解决案件进入法院难的问题。第六章主要进行经济公益案件审判制度的改革设想。这里的审判制度指法院内部影响案件裁判结果的制度性因素的总和，包括初审管辖、审判方式、审理模式和法官的精英化。经济公益诉讼应当建立由高级法院为主、中级法院与最高法院为辅的初审管辖制度，这样有利于确保案件审判质量，这也是经济公益诉讼顺利开展的基础。在举证责任的分配上，要充分考虑的经济公益案件类型的特殊性，充分运用司法能动性来克服传统举证责任制度之不足，以最大限度地保护公共经济利益。此外，应当建立经济公益庭，推行专业化和综合性审判制度，一次性地解决经济公益纠纷；经济公益庭应当由经验丰富的优秀法官组成，并保障其享有足够的职业优越感和事业成就感。第七章主要论述经济公益诉讼生效裁判执行的强化与完善。生效裁判得以有效执行是实现经济公益案件诉讼目的的最终环节。为了有效克服我国普遍存在的执行难问题，使经济公益诉讼制度真正成为保护公共经济利益的有效手段，应当抓好执行工作的每一环节，确保案件结果得以全面正确地执行。应当废弃传统诉讼中的申请执行制度，建立经济公益诉讼案件生效裁判自动转入执行机制。强制执行中可以吸收政府部门和社会力量的参与，增大案件执行力度和执行工作的透明度。可以充分利用声誉罚、资格罚等新型执行措施，充分体现司法裁判的威慑力，督促被执行人限期履行生效裁判确定的义务。在确保案件得以全面及时执行的基础上，应当对执行款实行胜诉份额限期保留和按比例分配提留制度，以确保起诉人的胜诉预期收入并促进经济公益诉讼制度的良性发展。经济公益诉讼作为一种全新的诉讼形式，其制度构建既要坚持经济法的基本思想，也要认识到现有诉讼制度无法为公共经济利益提供充分有效的司法保护并进而需要进行相关制度创新。当然，社会公众对公共经济利益认知水平的提高、中介组织功能的完善、行政与司法的良好配合等诸多因素也对经济公益诉讼制度的构建起到巨大的作用。本文主要采取了比较研究、历史研究、法社会学研究及案例分析研究等方法。更多还原

【Abstract】 Economic law is the entity law to protect the public economic interests of society, publicinterest litigation system is the special procedural law to protect the public interest, and bothhave consistency in the systematic values. Litigation is the universal feature of legal norms.The three main components of economic law-market regulation law, economic supervisingand macroscopic regulating law, which should have litigation without exception, Because threetraditional litigating systems have non-economic attribution in right relieves and non-sciencein operations for the resolving of economic law disputes, the realization of economic lawshould seek a new litigating procedural law. As a result, the economic public interest litigationcame into being.Traditional litigation system plays an important role in the protection of personal interestsand national interests, but which has many difficulties in the protection of public interests. Afterlong-term research of scholars, although public interest litigation has obtained the selfautonomy of theory, but if we really want to play its systematic effect and solve the practicalproblems that public interests are normally ignored and not strongly protected by justice, wemust clearly understand that the reasons of infringements to public interests are many-sided,there are not only infringement act of citizens, legal persons and social organizations but alsothe abuses of power of administrative organizations. In this case, judicial protection of publicinterests should be adhere to the comprehensive hearing and dynamic concept of justice, thuswhich necessarily requires the breaks to the dividing methods of traditional litigation types.Therefore, I oppose to classify the public interest litigation into civil public interest litigationand administrative public interest litigation in the, but classify it into public interest litigation ineconomic，political and social areas according to its different areas in social life, among which,economic public interest litigation obviously belongs to economic areas and it is the type ofpublic interest that is needed to develop most urgently, which contains the contents of civil andadministrative public interest litigation advocated by the academic circle and also includes thetype of “pre-public interest litigation” such as securities fraud. In the construction of economicpublic interest litigation system, we should fully aware of the specialty of every stages fromlawsuit to hearing and implementation of public interest litigation cases as well as itsincompatibility to the traditional litigation approach, which is also the the reason why the economic public interest litigation has been put into practice but the implementation effect isnot ideal. Analysis and exploration on the dilemma And settlements of public interest litigationis the only way from theory to practice for the public interest litigation. The researchingpurpose of this article is to through the analysis of the dilemma and settlements of publicinterest litigation, thus forming the stimulating mechanism benefiting the implementation ofeconomic public interest litigation. This paper is composed of seven chapters.The first chapter mainly discusses the relationship between economic law and economicpublic interest litigation. First it discusses the background of economic law and the publicinterest position, then analyzes the development trend of the world of litigation system, thepurpose of litigation system is transformed from protecting the personal interest to maintain thepublic interests, the interests of plaintiff are changed from direct to indirect, as well as thehistorical necessity of the public interest litigation coming into being. Though the classificationof public interest litigation is not theoretically united, which should not classified by followingthe legal tradition of protection of private rights but research and practice according to thecontradictory states of all areas of social development. Economic interest litigation comes intoexistence just adapting to the outstanding contradictions and problems in the process ofeconomic developments, economic law and public interest litigation have not only theintegration in historical development but also consistence. Economic interest litigation is theimportant guarantee and realizing form of the actionability of economic law. The main types ofeconomic interest litigation have great difference in the justice of each country. The reason ofwhich is besides the differences of legal culture, mainly comes from the differences ofcontradictory form and urgency of different stages of economic development of each country.Hence current economic interest litigation should mainly include several typical forms such astaxpayers’ litigations, government purchasing public interest litigation, consumer’s interestprotection and the public interest litigation of product quality, environment protection, antitrustand unfair competition as well as securities fraud and so on.The second chapter elaborates the necessity and practical obstacles establishling publicinterest litigation system in our country. With the gradual deepening of development andreform and opening up, some deep contradictions have become increasingly exposed, thephenomenons that public economic interest are increasingly obvious such as consumptioninfringement, counterfeit and shoddy goods, tax abuse, loss of state assets, week of marketsupervision, and serious environmental pollution and so on. However, neither the administrative law enforcement,nor existing litigation system is able to provide adequate andeffective legal protection for economic public interest litigation. In addition, the goal ofbuilding a harmonious society and opening justice as well as the implementation of Judicialdemocratic policy also requires the court to break through the system and the mode of litigationnowadays.Therefore, building the economic public interest litigation system which reflects theparticipation of people is not only an urgent need for economic development but also the onlyway for the reform for the court itself. Inevitably, economic public interest litigation systemwill certainly meet the dual obstacles from concepts and systems when it is fully put intopractice. The severe lack of public interest ideas in society, the lack of the guidance ofsociological theory and dynamic judiciary concept of practitioners, the deep-rooted impact oftraditional litigation modes and so on, which form the conceptable obstacles for theimplementation of the economic public interest litigation.While the traditional labor divisionsystem of litigation, working mechanism inner the court and judicial supervision systemconstitutes the direct system obstacles for the implementation of public interest litigationsystem. Meanwhile, the serious shortage of judicial authority, the functional defects ofintermediary organizations are also the major obstacles which has to be considered andovercome by the economic public interest litigation system while its implementation.The third chapter analyzes the theory and practice of economic public interest litigation inTaiwan and abroad. In ancient Rome, there is difference between public interest litigation andprivate interests’ litigation. The essence of public interest litigation is that plaintiff protects thepublic interests in the name of individual, of course including economic public interestlitigation this paper refers to. Group litigation of America, especially securities fraud grouplitigation just reflects the essential features of the economic public interest litigation. Besides,there are environmental public interest litigation, antitrust public interest litigation, informerlitigation, taxpayers’ litigation and so on in the United States. There are also various forms ofeconomic interest litigations in other countries, such as Britain, Germany, France, Japan, India,and China’s Taiwan,which is worth of our reference. Especially in India, the Judicialphilosophy of letters and initiative judicial philosophy in the aspects of public interestprotection from the court is particularly worth us to learn.The fourth chapter mainly introduces the several typical forms of economic public interestlitigation that have been or urgently needed to be developed at present stages of our country,they are taxpayers’ litigation, government purchasing public interest litigation, consumer’s interest protection and product’s quality public interest litigation, securities fraud public interestlitigation, environmental protection public interest litigation, antitrust and unfair competitionpublic interest litigation as well as macro-control public interest litigation. This section ismainly based on case studies and combines the practical experiences at home and abroad,intuitively explained the necessity, legitimacy and feasibility of the development of these typesof public interest litigation in China, on one hand, which confirms the representation of thedevelopment of litigation purposes and litigation interest theory among economic publicinterest litigation, on the other hand, which proposes some particular recommendations andrequirements for perfecting the related public interest litigation with combing the problems ofexisting and cruxes.Chapter V discusses prosecution incentive measures in the implementation of economicpublic interest litigation system. Prosecution is the basic stage of litigation procedures. It is thehotspot and focus that has been always concerned by the academic circles to encourageprosecution principal promoting the implementation of public interest litigation. Economicpublic interest litigation should practise comprehensive prosecution incentive mechanism,including the types of prosecution principal and clarity of sequence, the range of filing and theopeness of standard, materially incentive mechanism, court-directed system and so on.Amongwhich materially incentive mechanism ist the most concerned incentive way. The prosecutionprincipal system that based on intermediary organizations and aided by individual andprocuratorial organs should be established to let public interest litigation become the importantbusiness and the sources of income of intermediary organizations, thus forming benigninteraction between the implementation of economic public interest litigation and growth ofintermediary organizations. The sources of incentive funds should mainly rely on thecommission of winning a lawsuit and raise funds by publishing law lottery to provide plentylaw guarantee for incentive funds. In addition, the prosecution way of economic public interestcases should be looser than traditional litigation modes. Letters administrative system in Indiacan be adopted to enhance the initiative of public interest cases accepted by the court. Thecosts of litigation should be extensively reducted, exempted and postponed to effectively solvethe problem that cases are difficult to go into the court.Chapter VI mainly assumes on the reform of the trial system of economic public interest cases. The trial system here refers to the sum of institutional factors which affects the juridicalresults of cases within the court, which includes the jurisdiction of first instance, trial mannerand mode and elite judges. Economic public interest litigation should establish the first instancejuridical system which is based on the High Court and aided by intermediate Court, by this waythe qualities of cases are assured and thus corresponding judicial credibility is formed, which isalso the foundation that the incentive mechanism of economic interest litigation is formed. Inthe allocation of the responsibility of proof, we should not only fully consider the proof-givingability of the litigant, implementing corresponding proof-giving responsibility systemaccording to different types of economic public interest cases but also make full use ofinitiative of justice to overcome the inadequacy of proof-giving system in order to protectsocial public interest maximally. In addition, economic public interest court should beestablished, professional and integrated judicial system should be implemented and publicinterest disputes should be soluted one time. Economic Public Court should select the personsfrom excellent judges with rich experiences and guarantee that they have adequateoccupational superiority and career successful sense.Chapter VII mainly discusses the strength of the measures of economic public interestlitigation implemented by the sentence. Effective execution of sentence is the final factor toachieve the goal of economic public interest litigation. In order to effectively overcome theproblems which are difficult to be executed and commonly existed in our country and reallymake economic public interest litigation system become the effective means of protectingpublic interests, every aspect of executing work should be well done to ensure the outcome ofthe case is fully and correctly implemented. The application executing system of traditionallitigation should be abandoned and the mechanism that effective sentence of economic publicinterest litigation cases execution mechanism automatically transferred to the executingprocedure should be established. The participation of governmental departments andcommunity can be absorbed during the enforcement and the power and transparency ofexecution should be enlarged. The new executing measures such as reputation and qualificationpenalty can be fully used and the deterrence of judicial sentence are fully represented, theobligations of executors that are decided by the effective sentence should be supervised to befulfilled within a time limited. On the basis of assurance that cases have been fully implemented, the system that reserving the executing money according to its winning share andrate to ensure the expected income of executors who have wined the lawsuit should beimplemented and promote the good development of economic public interest litigation system.更多还原