论公民诉讼私人原告的代表能力——以“塞拉俱乐部诉莫顿案”为例

作为美国环境公益诉讼“诉讼资格”问题上最经典的判例，“塞拉俱乐部诉莫顿案”引发了关于在公民诉讼中“诉讼资格”问题的讨论。鉴于“事实上的损害”及“美学和环境福利”上的损害，公民个人或其团体得以扮演“私人检察官”、“私方司法部长”的角色，对环境违法者提起“公诉”，成为环境资源法律的特殊执法主体。虽然这有助于扩大司法救济的范围，但同时也使我们面临着多种社会公共利益的冲突和选择、私人原告代表能力有限、纠纷解决成本过高等诸多问题。在无法有效解决这些问题的情况下，建立在公益诉讼模式基础之上的公民诉讼难以成为保障环境法有效运行的基本的司法形式。

On Representative Competence of Private Plaintiff in Citizen Suit

As the most classical legal precedent in litigation qualifications of American environmental public welfare lawsuits,"Sierra Club v.Morton" initiated the discussion of litigation qualifications in citizen suit.In view of injure in fact,aesthetics and environment,citizens or organizations act the role of private procurator or private minister of justice,present public prosecution to environmental lawbreakers,become the special law-enforced body on law of environment and resource.It contributes to expanding the scope of judicial redress,meanwhile,we have to confront the conflict and selection of multiple social public interests,limited representative competence of private plaintiff,too high costs of litigation and many problems.Therefore,new-fashioned citizen suit, which is established according to the mode of public welfare litigation,is difficult to become the basic judicial form of environmental law.