摘要
实现碳达峰目标和碳中和愿景一方面需要控制碳排放,另一方面需要增加碳汇。当前在林业资源遭受破坏的刑事案件中,部分地方人民法院积极发挥司法能动性,在裁判中创新,将认购林业碳汇作为一种新的“替代性修复方式”予以适用,并联合相关部门制定了认购林业碳汇指导办法,同时最高人民法院也通过发布司法解释的形式,对认购林业碳汇这一司法创新作出了回应。这些规范性文件的发布,为生态环境破坏责任人通过认购林业碳汇修复受损林业生态环境提供了基本的法律依据。但综合目前已有的裁判文书和公开资料来看,地方法院在适用认购林业碳汇这一新型“替代性修复方式”的过程中存在功能定位模糊、适用范围不清、适用顺位不明、认购项目混乱、碳汇损失评估欠缺规范等制度方面的问题。需从林业碳汇基本概念、生态环境损害救济原理、林业碳汇项目额外性标准和适度能动司法理念等4个方面对认购林业碳汇实践进行检视,从而明确认购林业碳汇能够有条件地赔偿生态环境期间服务功能损失的功能定位;明确作为认购林业碳汇对象的碳汇项目必须属于林业碳汇项目,且具有额外的项目增汇量,同时必须具有可交易性;明确认购林业碳汇必须在规则制度的设计上契合适度能动的司法理念。鉴于此,为了规范认购林业碳汇的司法适用,需要完善以下几个方面的规则和制度:一是需明确认购林业碳汇的适用范围;二是需清晰认购林业碳汇的适用顺位;三是需完善相应的鉴定评估机制,并适当引入社会参与;四是需规范林业碳汇的认购对象和方式,以加强与碳汇交易市场的衔接。
To achieve the goals of reaching peak carbon emissions and carbon neutrality,we need to control carbon emissions on the one hand and increase carbon offsets on the other.At present,in criminal cases concerning forestry resource damages,some people's courts in China have actively given full play to judicial initiative and innovated to apply the carbon offset purchase as a new‘alternative way of restoration’in adjudications.Meanwhile,in conjunction with relevant departments to formulate guidelines for the carbon offset purchase,the Supreme People's Court has also responded to this judicial innovation by issuing judicial interpretations.The release of these normative documents provides a basic legal basis for those responsible for the destruction of the ecological environment to repair the damage by purchasing carbon offsets.However,according to the existing adjudication documents and public materials,in the process of applying this new‘alternative way of restoration,’local courts have some institutional issues,such as vague functional orientation,unclear scope of application,unclear application sequence,confusion of carbon offset projects,and a lack of norms for carbon sink loss assessment.In view of this,the practice of the carbon offset purchase should be reviewed from four aspects:the basic concept of the forestry carbon sink,the principle of ecological environment damage relief,the extra standard of the forestry carbon offset project,and the concept of moderate judicial activism.Thus,local courts must make clear that the carbon offset purchase can conditionally compensate for the loss of ecological environment service function during the period;make clear that the carbon offset project as the object of the carbon offset purchase must belong to the forestry carbon offset project and have additional project offset and,at the same time,tradability;and make clear that the carbon offset purchase must be in line with moderate judicial activism in the setting of the rules and systems.In view of this,in order t
作者
林禹岐
吴昂
LIN Yuqi;WU Ang(Law School,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China;Dual Carbon Research Institute,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China)
出处
《中国人口·资源与环境》
CSCD
北大核心
2023年第12期71-82,共12页
China Population,Resources and Environment
基金
中国人民大学科学研究基金(中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助)项目“碳达峰碳中和多元治理典型案例研究”(批准号:23XN-0001)阶段性成果。
关键词
碳中和
认购
林业碳汇
生态环境损害赔偿
能动司法
carbon neutrality
purchase
carbon offset
compensation for ecological damage
judicial activism
