| | | | | 国际环境损害责任私法化析论 | | | 王秀梅 | | | 国际环境损害责任法的编纂和发展因为国际环境责任的私法化而出现突破和转机。“国际法不加禁止的行为产生的损害性后果的国际责任”存在的困境在于造成跨境环境损害的主体通常为私法主体,却要由国家为其承担国际责任,故难以为各国接受。预防原则已经成为国际环境法的基本原则,确立了国家对实施预防原则的国际义务,损失分担的安排借鉴了国际海上油污损害等领域环境损害责任私法化的成果,标志着国际环境损害责任正在向私法化发展。同时,国家在跨界环境损害中承担补充责任并应在安排损失分担方面起重要作用,而在国家作为造成跨界损害主体的某些特别领域,国家依然是承担责任的主体。
【作者单位】：西北政法大学国际法学院 陕西西安710063
【关键词】：国际环境损害责任;私法化;损失分担;预防原则;补充责任
【基金】：教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目“中国和平发展中的重大国际法律问题”(04JZD0015)
【分类号】：D996.9
【DOI】：CNKI:ISSN:1003-6873.0.2007-03-005
【正文快照】：
长期以来,国家的国际责任被分为两类,即传统的国家责任和国际法不加禁止的行为的国家责任。传统的国家责任深受格老秀斯“无过失即无责任”的“过失责任论”的影响,以国家行为的国际不法性作为国家承担责任作为前提。而人类进行的生产活动包括可能产生重大危险的活动并不为国际法所禁止,因此对由此导致的责任被称为国际法不加禁止的行为的国家责任,又被称为“合法活动造成域外损害的国际责任”、“跨界环境损害责任”、“国际赔偿责任”、“严格责任”、“无过错责任”、“结果责任”等,国际法委员会将其称为“国际法不加禁止的行为产生的损… | | |  推荐 CAJ下载  PDF下载 | | | CAJViewer7.0阅读器支持所有CNKI文件格式，AdobeReader仅支持PDF格式 | | | | Analysis on the Privatization of International Environmental Damage Liability | | | WANG Xiu-mei(Political Science and Law;Northwest University Xi'an;710063;China) | | | The codification of international environmental damage liability experienced a disruptive change.The dilemma in the codification before in international liability lies in the fact that the transnational damage of environment are usually caused by the subjects of private law,meanwhile the states are called to be responsible for the damage.The precautionary principle has been written into international environmental law and outties the precautionary obligation of countries. The sharing responsibility rule draws the experience in the compensation assessment for oil pollution damage and showed the tendency of privatization in international environmental damage liability.States still bear supplementary responsibility and play important roles in the arrangement of sharing of environmental responsibility.However in some special fields where states are the subjects and cause transnational environmental damage,states are still the subjects to bear compensation responsibility.
【Keyword】：the environmental damage liability;privatization;the precautionary principle;supplementary responsibility |
|
|
