The Protection Of Diffused Interests And The Expanding Of Parties' Standing

One important characteristic of Public Interest Litigation is that the foundation on which the plaintiff files litigation does not lie in his fundamental right affected or injured, but lies in the protection of the injured public interest. In such cases, the courts often refuse to accept the lawsuits for the reason that the persons filing the cases do not have direct interests in the suits. However, we should realize that in the field of the group invasion, the function of litigation should not limit merely in providing relief after event to the dividing victims and it should more take the functions of prevention before event and containment of the group invasion. Considering the promotion of public interest realization, it is important to make sure the claims standing for public interest be expressed in a manner which can cause enough concern to the claims. If the cases is for the need of executing line of duty and protecting Public Interest, the law should allow any Public-spirited person or organization can file a case on behalf of a group of person whose rights are effected, even if the person or organization filling the case do not have a direct interest in the litigation. Hence, the new litigation mechanism is needed for meeting new social demand and it challenges the traditional theory of the parties'standing. Facing the problem of expanding of parties'standing causing by the protection of diffused interests, there is a strategy spontaneously formed in the judicial practice to deal with such problem. The core of the strategy is the judge's discretion to break through the strict standard regulated by the law in the judge of interest representative. Considering the pragmatism, the author hold the view that the judge's discretion is feasibility. This kind of judicial activism also can obtain the legitimate explanation theoretically.In Chapter one, the author reviews the expanding of plaintiff's standing in the US environmental suits and analyzes several typical cases to illustrate that the most important characteristic in the US judicial practice is the judge's discretion on the problem of the parties'standing. In Chapter two, the author discusses the boundary of executing the judge's discretion and the legitimate foundation of the discretion. In Chapter three, the author analyzes the judicial practice in China and puts forward his view that in current circumstance of China, the feasible path to expand the plaintiff's standing relies on strategy spontaneously formed in the judicial practice to deal with...