The Supreme People's Court issued by the Supreme People's Court in 2023 The "Supreme People's Court on complete and accurately implement the new development concept to actively steadily promote carbon peak carbon and provide judicial services (hereinafter referred to as" Opinions ") and related typical cases，Treating heated discussion in the academic community。"Opinions" pointed out，The number of carbon -related cases increases，Urgently need timely、Powerful trial guidance。But now looking at，my country has not directly discharged greenhouse gases or climate change lawsuits caused by the "double carbon" policy。So，Can climate change lawsuits be classified in the category of public interest litigation? This paper argues that，It should be combined with the "double carbon" target and the current public interest litigation system，Systematic deconstruction of the main rules of public interest litigation，Breaking through the path obstacles to the public interest litigation of climate change。

　bet365 best casino games

In January 2023, the Supreme People's Court issued 11 guiding cases in the "Environmental Public Interest Litigation".，Among them, cases involving "climate change public interest litigation" case，For example, the Fifth Branch of the Chongqing People's Procuratorate, the Fifth Branch of the People's Procuratorate, lies in environmental pollution civil public interest lawsuits such as Chongqing Yuhuang Electric Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Supreme People's Court Guidance Case No. 204)。This case belongs to relief judicial，According to the "Law on the Control of Solid Waste Pollution bet365 live casino games Environmental Prevention"，The rules of environmental public interest litigation are used，The result of the judgment is to pay the environment for the defendant's payment environment。But because carbon emissions are not polluted gas emissions，Relief Justice cannot effectively respond to unknown risks in carbon emission behaviors，Taking traditional infringement liability regulations as the basis for relief，The judicial needs of the carbon emission governance cannot be fundamentally met。In short，The current public interest litigation rules system does not reflect the "carbon" attribute，The environmental public interest lawsuit in this batch of guidance cases does not reflect the characteristics of climate change lawsuits。

　　Outreach cases of climate change public interest litigation

In recent years，The rules of climate change litigation under the two major Falun Dafa shows different development orientation，A group of typical cases also appeared respectively。In some EU bills，The court made a judgment that the human rights law required non -state subjects to bear the responsibility for emission reduction。Taking the "Case of the Earth's Friends of the Earth" (hereinafter referred to as "Case 1") as an example，Seven social organizations have not fulfilled their obligations with Shell Company，Its carbon emissions behavior seriously affects the production and life of residents，Requirement of reducing carbon emissions。The court of first instance in accordance with the European Human Rights Convention and the Dutch Civil Code，Judgment Shell Company must take the total carbon emissions of the company in 2019，A target of at least 45%carbon reduction in 2030。Although there are no obvious and specific illegal acts in Shell Company，But the court from the perspective of public interest，Direct bet365 Play online games causality between the carbon emissions and damage emphasizes risk prevention，It is believed that the defendant is required to reduce carbon emissions year by year to meet the interests of the public。But in some American law cases，The attitude of the court shows another tendency。Taking "Natalie R. True Utah" (hereinafter referred to as "Case 2") as an example，Seven youths given the right to health given by the Constitution、Safety rights, etc., requires the Utah government to reduce fossil fuel development。Courts in accordance with economic law's "Federal Coal Law" and the principles of Polictical Question Doctrine，It is believed that the state government does not infringe the plaintiff's substantive procedural rights as the right to reject the plaintiff's claim。

There are many different places and differences in the two cases。The common point is that they belong to the "climate change public interest litigation"; the plaintiff's qualifications are relatively loose; the main basis is the constitution、Infringement Law, etc.; The cause and effect of fading behavior and damage; the inversion of the liability for proof; the trial results are attached to the national macro policy; the carbon emission prompts global warming is not air pollution。The difference is: on the one hand，Different judgment results。Case No. 1，Court of human rights protection、National positive obligations、The company's sustainable development、The defendant has the ability to afford the corresponding responsibilities and considers，and expand the expansion of legal provisions，Supporting the plaintiff's lawsuit request。Case II，The court believes that such demands involve political factors and scientific appraisal problems，Government carbon reduction plan involves economic development，There should be a coordinated bet365 live casino games adjustment of legislation or administrative department，Finally rejected the plaintiff’s lawsuit。On the other hand，Different litigation procedures。From the perspective of litigation procedures，Cases are biased towards civil public interest litigation，Case II is biased towards administrative public interest litigation。

　　Improve my country's climate change public interest litigation rules

First，Determine the functional positioning of the public interest litigation of climate change。Current，Whether carbon emissions belong to the harmful gas emissions will still be scientifically proof，But it is an indisputable fact that it has caused global warming，Countries have taken preventive measures to prevent further warming the world。Visible climate change lawsuits must reflect the attributes of prevention，Public interest litigation has a more significant prevention function than other types of lawsuits，More in line with the needs of climate change governance。At the macro level，Seeking preventive judicial relief，It must be clear that the country has obligations to avoid the deterioration of the climate，It is also obliged to promote economic development，and thus derive the active protection obligations of the country in the climate change。At the micro level，This obligations are not at the abstract generalization obligation，Instead, it should be the specific obligation of every member of the society。In order to implement this obligation，Court、Procuratorate and social organizations must be committed to this obligation in content、range、degree、The specificization of responsibility，and take supervision and accountability as an important task。So，Climate change Charity lawsuits must not only reflect preventive functional function to prevent climate Bet365 app download deterioration，It is also necessary to reflect the protective function of the country's active protection of people's rights，This is also the basis of dividing it into civil public interest litigation and administrative public interest litigation。

Next，Return to general proof of the distribution rules of liability。Public interest litigation liability inversion rules are not suitable for climate change public interest litigation。On the one hand，There is no height causal relationship between carbon emissions and environmental damage results，and the rise of scientific evidence，Independent third -party monitoring agencies to some extent make up for the defects of the plaintiff's ability to verify。On the other hand，Instal attention to the liability of proof，The plaintiff only needs to provide preliminary evidence for the "causal relationship" and public interests between the carbon emissions behavior and damage results of the defendant.，Based on the characteristics of carbon dioxide，This will further increase the defendant's proof liability。So，Climate change public interest litigation liability rules shall be adjusted appropriately，The following suggestions are as follows: First, return to general proof of the distribution rules of responsibility，The plaintiff shall proof how much correlation with the results of the defendant's carbon emissions and the possible damage results，and give preliminary certification standards; the second is to establish a method for causal relationship analysis，The independent third -party monitoring agency and the national carbon reduction plan、indicators、Appraisal standards, etc. are included in the analysis of causality; the third is to play the role of independent third -party monitoring agencies，Give independent third -party appraisal report recognition，At the same time, emphasize the identification agency's proof of responsibility，Bet365 app download Unity of rights and obligations。

Last，Build a responsibility system with preventive responsibility as the core。In the past global climate governance，Carbon reduction liability is more inclined to be considered a kind of relief liability that has been filled before。So，Countries in various countries according to the national development level、Region、Historical emissions、Per capita emissions and other factors have proposed various distribution standards，But by conflict between national interests and different values，The justice of allocating standards has always been controversial。Lift it before，The court must take into account procedural justice and result justice，Often can only be pinned in the ability to move。So，Carbon reduction liability shall break the traditional legal architecture represented by the responsibility，Emphasize the country、Attention obligations of the carbon emissions subject，Forms a responsibility system with the core of prevention of responsibility。The advantage of preventing responsibility is，First, the role of preventing risks is strong，It can effectively respond to the future climate risk caused by carbon emissions; the second is based on science and technology，Forms a relatively objective standard of accountability; the third is to consistent with the concept of the low -carbon economy，Help Carbon Dafeng、Carbon neutral implementation。Of course，Construction of the preventive responsibility system means the focus of climate change governance.，For this, the state must formulate a reasonable carbon emissions plan，Actively carry out international cooperation，Further improve the carbon information disclosure system、Environmental evaluation system and other supporting measures，The continuous improvement of my country'bet365 best casino games s cope with the level of climate change governance and governance capabilities。

　　(Author is Associate Professor of Law and Public Management College of Hunan University of Science and Technology)