英文摘要 |
For the protection of public interests, such as environmental pollution, food sanitation, waste disposal and other matters associated with people's life security, people should have the right of supervision and responsibility, but due to the current administrative rules' limitation on public interest standing, public interest litigation is not as effective as demonstrated. However, China this year officially authorized prosecutors to deal with rights of public interest litigation case and expect prosecutors in addition to fighting crime, who can also bear the responsibility of administrative omissions, crimes or any other harms people's unlawful decisions resulting in infringement of people's rights. Prosecutors are the representatives of the public, and granted standing directly through the statutes seem proper and reasonable. However, the line of separating the executive power and judicial power has been thought un-crossable, and to comprehensive legislation to regulate their standing would face many obst acles. After all, prosecutors are excelled in criminal expertise, and how to make segregation of duties between administrative and criminal matters would not be easy. Administrative investigation is concerned with the executive powers, not crimes, but various types of public interest litigation could be involved in both of administrative omissions with crimes. How to ensure that people's constitutional rights are not restricted when two overlap is a big doubt. This paper aims to support the implementation of public interest litigation, rather than to be against the Prosecution's right of public interest standing. Thus, we start with an overview of the prosecutor's role, status and duties in Taiwan, and next we think backwards to prove people's standing in public interest litigation cases is more feasible. |