| Abstract: | 本研究由三部分構成：一為我國公害糾紛處理法之整理、檢討；其次，提出比較法之分析研究，其對象包括日本、美國及德國；最後則為修法建議。申言之，本研究首先整理我國公害糾紛處理法之主要內容，並針對適用對象範圍、糾紛處理機構之型態、糾紛處理手法及程序、糾紛處理程序中當事人之地位、調處及裁決制度、公害鑑定、公害陳情等提出檢討。其次，介紹日本、美國及德國之公害糾紛處理制度，主要分為處理機構、處理程序、發展動向及法理探討四個面向，並分析引進我國之可能性及優劣利弊。最後，針對實務運用滋生爭議、法理層面未臻妥適或立法闕漏，以及制度再強化之可能性三大議題，擬定（1）裁決委員會之組成、（2）處理程序之運用、（3）裁決之對象、效力、（4）裁決委員會之組織定位、（5）調處、裁決採二級制之商榷、（6）涉及當事人程序利益應納入母法規範、（7）增訂時效中斷規定避免權利失效、（8）增設紓處程序之規定、（9）充實裁決程序之規定、（10）增設原因裁決之規定、（11）增設仲裁程序之規定、（12）增設證據之相關規定、（13）增設環境保護協定之程序規定等相關修法建議，期能使公害糾紛處理法理論與實務兼備，符合環境保護、紛爭解決及永續發展等目標。
This Project includes three major parts: (1) analysis and examination of the existing Environmental Dispute Resolution Act(the Act), (2) a comparative analysis of the legislations of environmental dispute resolution in Japanese, US and Germany, and (3) suggestions on amendment of the Act. To be specific, the first part summarizes the context of the existing Act, and focus on the issues related to the scope of applicability, the types of institutes for dispute resolution, the methods and procedures of dispute resolution, the status of the persons involved in the dispute resolution, the system for resolution and arbitration, the inspection of public nuisance, the claims of public nuisance, etc. The second part introduces the resolution systems adopted in Japan, US and Germany, with a focus on the in-charge institutes, the resolution procedures, the development trend, and discussion of the legislation rationales. In addition, the second part also explores the possibilities of adopting the systems used in such foreign jurisdictions, and the pros and cons thereof. After taking into account the possible pitfalls in practice, the inappropriate or missing part of the current legislation, and the possibility of reinforcing the system, the last part presents the following suggestions on amendment of the Act: (1) the constitution of the administrative arbitration committee, (2) the application of resolution process, (3) the persons subject to the resolution and the validity thereof, (4) the status of administrative arbitration committee, (5) the discussion on 2-level systems for resolution and administrative arbitration, (6) the due process rights involving the subject persons shall be adopted in the regulatory regime of the parent legislation, (7) supplementation of the provisions related to interruption of statute of limitation to avoid invalidity of the rights, (8) supplementation of the rescue mechanism, (9) supplementation of the details of resolution procedures, (10) supplementation of the provisions related to summary judgment, (11) supplementation of administrative arbitration procedures, (12) supplementation of the provisions related to the rules of evidence, and (13) supplementation of the provisions regarding procedures for environmental protection agreements. It is expected that both the practice and the theory of Environmental Dispute Resolution Act can be preserved, and the targets including environmental protection, dispute resolution and sustainable development can be reached. |
