Prompt: This is a few years ago works, after the completion of the works in recent years, public interest litigation in our country has not made any progress, but also the declining trend, from the oil spill in the Gulf of Bohai, Shifang, Xiamen, Dalian molybdenum copper project and petrochemical project lead to social group events and so on, are not a normal outcome. In fact, this kind of problem, can be solved in a perfect public interest litigation system, but also between the maximum integration of social level, every interest group demand, will drop to the lowest level of conflict. In view of this, this paper do not modify the.

                                          Public interest litigation

One, leadWords
China's reform and opening up has been nearly thirty years, great progress have made in many aspects, the comprehensive national strength increasing. However, in this is hidden behind many of the turbulent undercurrent, once handled carelessly, social problems will lead a wide range, even the society as a whole to subvert. Such as environmental protection, consumer protection, the loss of state-owned assets and the many other harm the public interest, This is not the only one. They all have one thing in common, that is because of a group or minority interests at the expense of the other vast not specific to the interests of the people, and the strength difference. According to the procedure law and the existing system of our country, can't make this part not specific to the legitimate interests of the people are protected, not punish those powerful infringing party, leading to a serious imbalance of social justice. In the legal system of developed countries, this kind of problem is mostly through the public interest litigation system to solve, and our country is in the public interest litigation system is still a blank. This paper will research on the public interest litigation system history and experience, focuses on China's existing political system, and the establishment of public interest litigation.

The two, public interest litigation
(a) the origin and concept of public interest litigation
Public interest litigation is relative to the private interest litigation, it has many names and a different definition of scope. As in the USA called for public action (Public Law Litigation) , by government agencies or private plaintiffs like ordinary private litigation in general court, seeking to recover money as civil penalties, or seek an injunction, ordered the defendant to stop continue to violate applicable. [1] in Germany and other countries, is through the group litigation form to achieve the protection of public interests.
In my Ancient Chinese Literature Search circles, the definition to the public interest litigation, there are two kinds of mature view. One is the Renmin University of China law school Wang Feimin as the representative of the "relief object general said", that refers to a specific state organs and relevant organizations and individuals, according to the legal authorization, in violation of laws and regulations, violations of national interests, social interests and specific interests of others, to the court, the legal responsibilities shall be investigated by the court according to law activities. [2] is another kind "relief object narrow sense", that refers to any organization or individual can be according to the laws and regulations of the authority, in violation of the law, the violation of national interests, social public interests, have the right to sue to the court, the court held the law liability norms [3]. Both debatable. "Broad sense" of the standing grasps quite accurately, but the relief object extends to a specific individual interests, which are not consistent with the principle of private autonomy; "narrow sense" for the relief object understanding is not accurate, not a specific person's interests should also be included in the scope of public interest litigation. And to prosecute the understanding of the subject is too broad, in fact not all organizations and individuals are able to sue the court itself, e.g., a person without capacity. Therefore, the author believes that public interest litigation refers to a specific state organs, social groups, individual citizens according to the laws and regulations authorized, in violation of national interest, social interest and not a specific person's interests, bring a lawsuit to the judicial authorities in their own names, be held responsible harm behavior, one kind of lawsuit activity to realize and protection in order to public interests.
The modern public interest litigation system is with production socialization degree deepening and gradually develop, it is the product of the market economy and national regulation is strengthened and combined. As Italy jurist professor Cappelletti said: "with the increasing complexity of modern society, only one action can cause many people might benefit or suffer adverse events occur frequently, the result makes the traditional to a lawsuit between the two parties are considered more is not very complete framework". "Today in the welfare state has taken some corresponding measures....... However, overlooked point is, each and every one of the composition of the group, even if there is a cause of action in a series, in most cases, and no ability to protect themselves and put it into action. Among them, the lack of knowledge and can not afford to solve disputes, seek personal interests and support costs. These two points are the great obstacles. Therefore, at present a major problem in judicial field. Not to deal with the group infringement when aid for the individual, but in advance so as to prevent the occurrence of violations and the realization of public interest, form the group assistance scheme has effectiveness." [4]
And to the public interest litigation originated, scholars generally believed to have originated in Rome. In Rome law, public interest litigation is a part and private interest litigation relative form of action as the programming procedure. Private interest litigation and public interest litigation compared, "the former is the protection of personal rights, only certain people can mention; the latter is the protection of public interest litigation, with the exception of the law has special provisions, where the public can lodge." In the public interest litigation, divides into the civil law public interest litigation and public interest litigation justice law. "The former regulated by civil law, the defendant to pay fines to the Treasury, but prosecutors can receive a bonus; the latter is required the defendant to pay a fine and ordered to, belong to the prosecution of all, if there are the same cases prosecuted by the judge, choose one for the plaintiff." [5]
Public interest litigation system settings and even can be said to be an organic part of the ancient Rome empire of democracy, it is to protect the public interest in the name of the judicial power, the most important is, it will request the right of judicial relief is the procedure start right gives ordinary people. Because in many cases, state agencies or officials may because of dereliction of duty, fear, worry, be bought, the consistency of the interests and other reasons to remain silent for illegal activities and failed to initiate a lawsuit, and offenders to try and prevent the proceedings through intimidation or buying all the people start is impossible, theater and the public effect plus the adversarial court trial, but also incorporated into the scope of judicial review in the exercise of decision-making process to a certain extent part of public policy and public power, effectively prevent the abuse of power.
   Thus, the public ancient Rome law litigation has the characteristics as follows: (1) the plaintiff in public interest litigation is not a specific person, can be no interested person, can also be interested. If the plaintiff has many people, a suitable candidate for judge selection as the plaintiff. (2) the plaintiff's purpose is not for their own interests, but in order to safeguard the social public interests, safeguard the dignity of law and social justice. (3) the scope of violations of the plaintiff may prosecute wide, both civil tort, and other illegal acts, criminal acts. (4) the plaintiff can be rewarded in the case, not get compensation. (5) role of public interest litigation is a supplement to the law enforcement of state organs, and not replace national organs of law enforcement. [6] of course, in the Rome times only has Rome citizenship to the plaintiff, and the scope of plaintiff is not very extensive. In the ancient Rome law has no concept and pattern formation of group action.

(two) the development of public interest litigation
 After the public interest litigation in the ancient Rome law flower briefly as the broad-leaved epiphyllum, along with the ancient Rome Empire, Europe gradually entered the feudal society, public interest litigation has lost its living space. Rome revival, it was absorbed as the cornerstone of modern legal system of modern western, the spirit and essence has been integrated into the modern western legal system, whether civil or common law, we can find the effect from the traces in Rome. The public interest litigation system in Rome has been inherited and developed.
Provisions 1807 French "code of civil procedure", the prosecutor can prosecution of civil activities, modern civil public prosecution legislation. However, the modern public interest litigation real prototype is still after the industrial revolution. At the end of nineteenth Century and early twentieth Century, due to the development of social economy, politics, culture appeared in the Department of economic law, American and Germany is one of the pioneer. Germany established the group litigation mode by economic legislation. Many legal subject it will have a common interest in the right to prosecute "trust" to the public nature of social groups, the social organizations filed with its articles of association, to set up the litigation, judgment for the group and its members against the defendant, effectiveness of indirect benefit groups of favorable decision.
USA is the integration of the two legal systems. In 1890, USA Congress passed "the Sherman Antitrust Act" to oppose the monopoly, and monopoly enterprise merger behavior prohibits horizontal integration between enterprises to restrict competition. It provides for violation of the law, the Justice Department, the federal government, organizations and individuals may bring a lawsuit. In 1914, USA and formulated the "Clayton method" supplement "Sherman method", the prohibition of price discrimination, abuse of economic advantages and destroy the competition order behavior, at the same time for the trust behavior except the victims have the right to sue, prosecutors also may bring a lawsuit to the court, held the law of civil liability, economic liability the criminal responsibility of individuals and organizations, can be sued for offenders to stop illegal behavior.
Generally speaking, in the first half of the twentieth Century, the public interest litigation system has not yet been finalized, but with their own characteristics, continue to develop in depth.

Develops the current situation three, public interest litigation in foreign countries
Later, in the late sixty's of the last century, public interest litigation countries mostly occurred in the texture changes, the modern public interest litigation system has been improved, which USA and Germany is the most significant, and their respective representatives of public interest litigation system. India is in the developing world to outshine others, considerable progress has made in the public interest litigation system. Relatively speaking, the countries of continental law system of public interest litigation system emphasis on group litigation, the litigation procedure system stipulated by law, restriction of individuals in this litigation ability. In Anglo American law system countries is relatively free, general is established through precedent, but America is an exception. The following will be divided and the.
(a) the countries of continental law system of public interest litigation system
Germany 1After World War II, the German economy rapid growth, which led to many new social problems. Changes in the law are most concerned about is the 1965 revised "to prevent unfair competition law", consumer gives the industry outside groups filed a lawsuit to request issued a writ of prohibition of rights, can be said of the mark sex system in civil law system countries is the modern public building. In 1976 the "ordinary trade clauses AGBG" also put on the use of illegal behavior about a writ of prohibition rights endowed with consumer groups. In addition, consumer groups also there can be obtained from the individual mandate, in their own name to bring a damage. Moreover, 1977 years to prevent unfair competition law draft also explicitly recognized by consumer groups to obtain compensation request authorization from their members of consumers, in its own name and a lawsuit. In the "law", "prize gift discount law" also have similar provisions. [7]
2 France The French civil procedure law the 421st regulation, the procuratorate based parties recognize litigation, or from the parties to participate in the proceedings, in the law case, procuratorate representative. The provisions of article 422nd, the special provisions in the law, procuratorate authority in litigation. The provisions of article 423rd, except the law has special provisions in the circumstances, it is detrimental to the public litigation, procuratorate to maintain public order . Rule 425th the following cases procuratorate shall notice as the case from the parties: (1) involves parent-child relationship, minor custody arrangements set and change, the adult guardianship cases; (2) the current suspension of prosecution procedure, collective, personal bankruptcy debt program verification procedures or other sanctions; relates to a legal person, the referee cleaning or liquidation procedures, referee liquidation and reorganization procedure and the relevant responsible person of the company financial responsibility of the case; (May 12, 1981 No. 81-500) the views of the law's Procuratorate shall give. Group litigation system in France is relatively developed, the occupation France enjoy under the action of guild in the following circumstances: (1) the right must be occupation guild; 2) the pursuit of interests and the guild is consistent with the purpose, such as for the interests of the workers union may apply to the labour court proceedings; (3) tort do not constitute a crime, if the harm behavior has constitute a criminal offense, the group can not exercise. In addition, some French also enjoy action associations in the right, such as France's National Federation of family protection, prevent alcoholism Committee, province hunting alliance, maintain copyright writers association. [9]
(two) the current litigation system American
USA is one of the founders of modern litigation system, but also the world's public interest litigation system most perfect country. Compared with other countries of Anglo American law system, public interest litigation system have a style of one's own it more perfect, more comprehensive. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish with other countries of Anglo American law system, individual study. USA public interest litigation provisions contained in the statute laws of different, although the expression of content is not the same, but the basic contents are consistent, mainly including the following aspects:
(1) the plaintiff qualification
Plaintiff qualification is the most crucial problem in public interest litigation system. The provisions of public interest litigation in terms of the "Clean Air Act" provisions in the law only stipulates that "any man...... A lawsuit ", did not make any provisions of the interest relation between the plaintiff and the object of action. But writing "public interest litigation" in terms of the clean water act in two years, the lawsuit of citizenship for the restrictions, the "citizen" is defined as its interests are affected or may be affected persons. [10]
(2) the prosecution reasons
America public interest litigation defendant has two categories, one is private enterprises, including American government offenders; two is the responsible person of the administrative organ. The reason for its violation of the statutory obligations of the approved or the competent authority, the latter being sued for is the lax enforcement of non discretionary legal obligations.
(3) legal fees and other expenses
Public interest litigation in the plaintiff is not to profit for the purpose, but if the litigation process costs can not be effectively compensation, is bound to affect the public welfare lawsuit widely used. In order to encourage public interest litigation, Congress authorized the court in "it deems appropriate" afford an attorney in many public interest litigation clause. The Congress to "the court considers appropriate" as legal fees standard, gives the court discretion of great power. This on the one hand is to encourage public interest litigation, on the other hand is to prevent unnecessary litigation.
(4) the public welfare lawsuit limitation
In order to prevent the public interest litigation is excessive, Congress specified restrictions in the legislation: 1 the prosecutor must in the prosecution of the former will be written "Notice of intention to prosecute offenders and administrative organs". Notice within 60 day to day in the prosecution, the prosecution may bring a lawsuit to the court. 2 when the government departments in the court has to break the law when citizens are denied the right to prosecution, prosecution.
(5) the public interest litigation remedy
No legal relief type of public interest litigation made detailed provisions, but the civil litigation the plaintiff does not have the right to request money damages is a commonly accepted fact. At present, there are two kinds of public interest litigation remedy: 1 ban. Regulations permit the plaintiff requested the court to ban, requires agencies to take concrete measures to implement the law for. 2 Civil penalty. In America, civil penalties proposed by administrative organs or public interest litigation request, the court sentences the defendant to a certain amount of money. [11]
(three) other countries of Anglo American law system of public interest litigation system
The 1 BritishThe procedure legislation mode is relatively conservative. In the UK, the attorney general is only in the court on behalf of the public, is the representation of public interest. Although the local government and some organizations authorized by or on behalf of the public can be sued in its own jurisdiction, but generally not filed public interest litigation directly to private. [12] however, in 1977 the upper house decision to Gburiet v. Union of Workrs case form withdrew this principle, affirmed the president of the court of appeal, Lord Denning in 1973 made judgment advocated, namely social members can act as the private prosecutor in that role, apply to the court for violation of public interests of people issued a ban, the conditions for the attorney general had refuse to give personal prosecution authority or unreasonable delay in giving permission decision. [13]
The 2 India India since the reform and opening in 1992, its economic development is lagging behind the Chinese. But the public interest litigation system since the 70's of the twentieth Century began to build, is booming, walk in the front of the Chinese, become an independent school in the process of development of public interest litigation in the world. The public interest litigation, the judicial tentacles extended to all areas of society, actively respond to the social changes and social reality demand, so as to promote the transformation of society. India's public welfare lawsuit concept has its specific meaning. In 1981, the Supreme Court in the case of P.N.Bhagwati S.P.Gupta v. the government of India on the concept "public interest litigation if the violation of legal rights of an individual or a class of people and the caused error or damage law, but the person or people in this stratum by weak state can not cause to the society economic status to the court law, any citizen or social groups can apply to the high court or the Supreme Court, seeking legal error or damage to this class of people suffer for judicial relief." [14] we see from the definition of the concept of,, the Supreme Court of India through radical reform, relaxed the litigation subject qualification, any individuals and non-governmental organizations have the right to initiate public interest litigation, without the need to prove their direct interest with the case, and the court of first instance level. This is the most typical characteristics of India public interest litigation system. The traditional litigation emphasizes the standing of the plaintiff, the plaintiff must obtain the qualification, must prove their rights have been violated. This theory makes the protection of the public interest the judicial vacuum. The India Supreme Court consciously relax litigation subject qualification, will make up for the blind. In addition, the India public interest litigation system also created the "letters of jurisdiction, the court may" jurisdiction according to a letter, any person or organization to write a postcard or submitted reports to exercise public interest litigation.
In India, public interest litigation system, when the public interests are affected, any individual can filed public interest litigation, without the need to prove their direct interest in the case. But, not for individual personal lawsuit filed public interest litigation, but only to the federal government, the central government and municipal authorities and other state agencies. Private parties can act as co defendant to join the public welfare lawsuit.

Four, public interest litigation in the development situation of our country
Public interest litigation is a new point in the field of Chinese procedural law, has great potential. But so far only stay in the academic discussion and the folk autonomous rights stage, the true sense of the public interest litigation system in our country has not started.
(a) public interest litigation in our country present situation
Public interest litigation Chinese, in recent years by law, judicial circles, the media widely mentioned and discussed the domestic. 2005 is the Chinese has the public welfare lawsuit the emergence of a year. In the case of the number, type, influence, to promote the legislation, the law and in the litigation practice is clearly identified as a concept proposed, there is considerable progress. The following quote some Chinese public interest litigation network of typical cases and data, although the authority is not very strong, but basically can reflect this situation.
This year there have been a number of representative litigation nature of the case. Tsinghua University Dr. Li Gang because of Tianjin, Shanghai two municipalities directly under the central government to the motor vehicle owner charged "into Tianjin fee", "entry fee" messy legislative, charges and public discrimination is suspected, the civil procedure. Master Hao Jinsong of China University of Political Science and Law law for refund, train station not invoice, sales invoice, the subway train without toilet not invoice and other public utilities units long ignored the laws of the country, the consumers have the terms of overlord and the Railway Bureau for many times to court. "Business news" reporter Yu Shanlan China because that traffic peony card is missing required to pay 100 yuan fill card fees no legal basis and violates the rights and interests of consumers, industrial and Commercial Bank of China Xuanwu branch and Chinese sued Beijing branch of unjust enrichment, the Beijing intermediate people's court in February 1, 2005, Yu Shanlan win final judgment, judgment of ICBC returned him fill card costs 69.2 yuan and interest. The Law School of Renmin University of China doctoral student in Song Dexin in 2004 August, "highway not high" on the grounds, sued the Henan Provincial Expressway Development Co., Ltd, asking the court to order the breach, and compensate the direct economic loss of 10 yuan of money. In 2005 by the Zhengzhou City Intermediate People's court, the court conciliation. The accused apologetic for pavement repair due to the inconvenience, the plaintiff give up claims. Beijing Shifoying primary school students father think school fees in violation of the provisions of the compulsory education law, the prosecution of the Beijing Municipal Education Commission, the western city court think, do not belong to the administrative jurisdiction of the trial court, dismissed the action request.
   Also, some representative cases had certain influence to the legislation and judicature. For example, the Sun Zhigang case "to promote the change of the State Council professor" detaining for reeducation and regulations, China executive, legislature, judicial organs reached a tacit agreement: if problems should be in Chapter Li system, internal corrective to solve, this is Chinese from rule by men to a "syndrome specific phenomenon in the period of transition the rule of law". The National Lawyers Association Constitution Rights Commission Director Wu Ji agent female teacher Huang naked death death case of litigation, 5 autopsy 6 identification, finally still inconclusive cases, caused the highest legislative attention, National People's Congress on February 28, 2005 made "about judicial expertise management decision", immediately in October 1st of that year. The exposure and reflect on the She Xianglin case and a series of misjudged criminal cases, the strict censorship requirements of evidence in criminal trial and public asked the Supreme Court to recover the right to review death penalty, and. The scrutiny is v., innocent guilty is asking Supreme procuratorate. The Ministry of public security is more rigorous cleaning and sanctions torture to extract confessions problem.
But these are just scattered individual action, has not formed the scale, the influence is very limited. But also some public interest litigation is not the strict sense, such as the She Xianglin case. To establish a true sense of the public interest litigation system, in our country is still faced with many obstacles and difficulties.
(two) the establishment of public interest litigation system in our country disorder
 In recent years, on the establishment of public interest litigation is growing, there were a lot of influence, representative of the public interest litigation case. However, China is a civil law countries, the case is not binding for third people, they can only be regarded as the normal legal rights of the people, to establish public interest litigation system plays a key role and cannot take them as the beginning of the system. These cases also reflects the existence of the public interest litigation system efficient barrier.
The first is the understanding of the national leadership is not enough. This obstacle mainly lies in the ruling party and the organs of state power. Because the unified centralized government management mode of our country with thousands of years, for the country life basically is top down, once out of the track will cause social unrest, overthrow. Although people's relatively liberal, democratic society relatively, but the basic form has not changed. To establish public interest litigation system, which is to be the first to break through the barriers. To make the ruling party to realize the importance of establishing public interest litigation system and urgency, use it to ensure the social strength and the balance of interests, safeguard social justice, ensure the benign development of the state and the society.
The second is the lack of the law. According to the provisions of the civil procedure law, the prosecution must have four conditions, first requires the plaintiff is a citizen, legal person or other organization that has a direct interest in the case will be the subject of public interest litigation qualification in China ruled out. Because in the public interest litigation in many victims are potential, with great uncertainty, the traditional approach requires the plaintiff is directly interested in the case is not suitable for public interest litigation in this new suit. Although our country litigation representative system, but far from satisfying the needs of the protection of public interest, but not operable. So that the strong harm behavior legally against the country, the society and the general people's interests, to obtain huge income.
The third is the legal system disorders. At present, the independence of court of our country is not strong, the quality is not high, lack of funds, the status is not high, and the judicial system of our country is lack of elasticity. The court in proceedings for commonweal attempt nothing and accomplish nothing. The lack of an independent judiciary, in many conflicts of interest in the court will consciously to succumb to the power and strong, made an unfair decision or omission. From the point of view of several current cases are so, such as Qiao Zhanxiang v. Ministry of Railways case, Ge Rui v. Zhengzhou Railway Station not losing is spending a huge amount of cost to get a victory, not worth mentioning, in addition to more prosecution rejected in the court outside the gate. The court in dealing with this kind of case not for the sake of the majority of ordinary, but consider if the victim after injuring party there will be heavy burden. Battle of interest and justice results take in everything in a glance, do not know who the judge thought not, if the offender and reasonable management, does not damage the interests of how numerous lawsuits have, how can have a heavy burden?
Fourth is the academic circles have not a relatively authoritative opinion, can not form a mainstream view. Can't put forward a workable proposal, it is difficult to obtain the state policy attention and importance. Current research on the understanding of public interest litigation and qualitative is all kinds of, in the form of litigation has advocated the establishment of administrative litigation and civil litigation and advocated the introduction of taxpayer litigation mode [15]. In qualitative is Public opinions are divergent., economic law, civil procedure law, contract law, administrative procedural law and so on, are different to each other. Basically all is one-sided, not to look at the issue from the overall point of view, it is difficult to convince the public.
In addition to these, there are a lot of establishing public interest litigation system in our country, but it is the few, the other can then be solved.
(three) the breakthrough point to establish public interest litigation system in China
There are many difficulties in establishing public interest litigation system in our country, but is not without hope and possible. In recent years the situation, there are still some development. We can also see hope to find the breakthrough point. The author thinks, in the present circumstances, the legal rights of the folk spontaneous alone in our political system is not much strength, the main obstacles and establishing public interest litigation system in our country is not enough attention to national decision-making layer. Therefore, let the ruling party and the organs of state power to realize the necessity and urgency of establishing public interest litigation system is the breakthrough point for the first.
China is a socialist country, the Constitution provides that "all the rights of the people's Republic of China belongs to the people. The people in accordance with the law, through various channels and in various forms of management of national affairs, economic and cultural affairs, the management of social affairs." The specific implementation of public interest litigation in litigation embodies these principles of the constitution, provides a realistic way and supervision and to these principles, promote the construction of socialist democracy to ensure citizens' legal rights. This is the necessity of establishing public interest litigation system. As for the urgency, that is not to say. In recent years, rapid economic growth, social rapid differentiation combination, the lack of an institutional framework and stable to restrict and balance, it is easy to cause the social conflict of interest. Vulnerable groups are often victims of these social conflicts of interest, and the existing system of law and it be at a loss what to do. Not only that, due to lack of institution, many public interests become tools and source of a certain group of others and grab the improper benefit, the loss of state assets, environmental protection and so on are embodied in this area. And these aspects are related to national development and social stability, we must make the ruling party to recognize the urgency of the problem.
Second breakthrough is the relevant academic organizations and scholars to study focused and specific, that is to concentrate on one aspect at the same time to put the details of specific and thorough, easy to operate. The author thinks, should be based on the existing civil litigation system based on the establishment of public interest litigation system in our country, as a special procedure in civil litigation. This is the international practice, but also due to the nature of public interest litigation. Acts endangering the public interest litigation is mainly involved in civil action, only a few have the administrative acts of nature, but such administrative behavior as abstract to non-specific people make, can't be adjusted by the existing administrative litigation law. In order to maintain the stability of the existing legal system, save the cost, reduce the resistance of reform, this part of administrative behavior unified the civil litigation is the most feasible method, only needs a little restrictions. This is conducive to the concentration of limited judicial resources, but also facilitate the public interest litigation system.

Five, to establish public interest litigation system in our country
To establish public interest litigation system in our country, the legislation is the premise. China is a written law country, the absence of relevant laws and regulations in it is impossible to establish public interest litigation system. In the legislation, to build a specific system design should take into account national conditions, people with long-term needs of the future, advanced experience of other countries in the world of the comprehensive reference, so that the system is practical and flexible. Otherwise, this system is also enjoy undeserved fame.
(a) legislation premise to establish public interest litigation system in our country
As mentioned before, the author thinks that we should put our public interest litigation is based on the existing civil litigation system, therefore, revise and perfect the "Civil Procedure Law" is the primary task. The establishment of public interest litigation system, first from the legislative point of view, in the "Civil Procedure Law" general settings of "public interest litigation" terms, provisions: specific organ of state functions (e.g., the procuratorial organs), social organizations and individuals to harm the national, social and other specific people's civil rights and interests of, in accordance with this Law and other laws provisions, in his own name to the court. As to protect the interests of the state and social public interests and the establishment of the procedure system, should reflect the social, public, allowing more can represent the interests of different levels of legal subject for more extensive public interest litigation, limit should not be the subject of litigation is too strict, should take the subject of litigation in the initial stage of liberal principles.
Secondly, the scope of protection of public interest litigation system. When it comes to damage the national interests, public interests and other damage not specific human interests, the procuratorial organs, social groups and individuals may be filed public interest litigation to the court, the legal responsibilities shall be investigated against the side of the. Violation of unfair competition law, violations of law in environmental protection action, resulting in the loss of state-owned assets behavior, damage the interests of consumers, the majority is not the specific behavior of the interests of the abstract administrative action, take the policy of discrimination against the citizens action and so on should be included in the scope of public interest litigation protection. At the same time, should be involved in criminal field part excluded, from the criminal law and the criminal procedure law to adjust.
Once again, the specific procedures of public interest litigation. Public interest litigation system and the traditional litigation varies, is a new litigation system. So the system to make some special provisions are necessary. For example, review system, the provisions of public interest litigation jurisdiction system, provides the some special rights and protection system in the litigation process.
The exception, in the formulation and revision of other special laws should adapt to the civil procedure law with the modified. In violation of the provisions of this Law and within the established public interest litigation scope, authorize the procuratorial organs, social organizations and individuals to file suits. In the special department law, can make some restrictions such as abstract administrative action, the administrative proceedings required before the administrative organs to correct in a within the statutory time limit, no correction can sue to the court, but shall not prohibit it violates the law of public interest litigation.               
(two) establishing public interest litigation system in our country
In the premise of related legislation, combined with the specific national conditions and the advanced experience of foreign countries for reference, public interest litigation system in our country should be the principle and the content of the following aspects.
1 jurisdiction principle. Public interest litigation should be relatively high in the jurisdiction, should by the intermediate people's court or the people's Court of first instance should be advanced. Because the number of public interest litigation involves many, complex relationship, extensive influence, need to be very professional business quality, more often than not, a grassroots people's court could bear.
2 the implementation of collegiality trial. Public interest litigation cases influence, complex legal relationship, the applicable law is difficult, the way a single judge trial failed, it should implement collegiate system of trial to trial, ensure the case smoothly.
3 the three instance and the Supreme People's Court of final appeal combination system. This is also the inevitable requirement of exhaustion of rights principle and litigation cost principle. In this system, up to a maximum of three trial, but the trial activities by the Supreme People's court implementation, even if is preliminary, and final.
  4 take special litigation rules. Public interest litigation the plaintiff's purpose may not for their own interests, but on behalf of the state, not the specific human to maintain public interest of litigation, the litigation rights is authorized by law, so the action of their litigation rights the plaintiff can not be like the private interest litigation. Unless the defendant has active remedy the violation of public behavior, cannot withdraw the prosecution, plaintiffs, defendants to prevent forced withdrawal, illegal behavior still exists.
　5 mediation system. Mediation in the litigation activities to be established is the premise of the parties have the right of disposition, in practice in order to achieve the results of mediation, the parties often have to give up part of the substantive rights. But the nature of public interest litigation determines that the plaintiff is on behalf of the state and the public will, its rights and obligations are specific, not on behalf of the state and the public to give up, right of disposition, do not talk to go up the negotiation, mutual compromise, in the lawsuit reconciliation problems, lack of conditions and the basic agreement, mediation will lose its value of existence. The public welfare lawsuit filed by procuratorial organs can be reconciliation under certain conditions, but the results must be made public, the victim has not satisfied, can appeal.
6 special pay the cost of litigation mode. Motivated by the need to encourage the public interest litigation, at the same time as the public interest litigation to bring people may not bring any benefits of public interest litigation, therefore, the plaintiff can not pay the cost of litigation, the defendant loses the case, the defendant bear the cost of litigation, the plaintiff's case, the lawsuit expense undertakes by the court, the judge reasonable cutting.
The 7 form of liability. In the public interest litigation, the defendant should bear the responsibility to enforce a ban, bear the responsibility for compensation and bear the legal responsibility and obligation more. On the liability of the defendant, should include the punitive damages has a deterrent effect.                                                                             
8 the defendant bear the burden of proof. Because of public interest lawsuit accused citizen or social groups are in a stronger position relative to, they tend to adopt various means to exclude evidence of the plaintiff, and by the force is very difficult to get strong evidence to support its claim, so it should reverse the burden of proof, the defendant shall bear the burden of proof.
9 Effect of expansion principle. The entry into force of the validity of judgment in addition to be binding upon the parties to litigation, but also benefit to all of the victim. The victim may according to the judgment of their own rights and interests in the legal period.
10 rewards and protection principle. because the defendant are in a strong position, is the plaintiff to retaliate to blow, especially the individual as the plaintiff's case is more likely. So we must have a mechanism to protect the plaintiff, personal safety, property safety guarantees on the privacy, as far as possible to the secret. At the same time, in order to stimulate public interest litigation should be carried out, reward to the plaintiff. Don't let the risk but also by further economic loss. The reward is a monetary reward, i.e. from the fine out the part of the plaintiff.
   
Six, nodeLanguage
Public interest litigation system since it appeared in the ancient Rome law, has a history of thousands of years. Although once interrupted for hundreds of years, but after catalytic method in Rome Renaissance and industrial revolution of two movement, not only back to life, but more and more energetic, in the unceasing development, become the main pillar of safeguarding the public interest, maintain social stability and balance of interests. Now many democratic countries in the world have established a relatively perfect system of public interest litigation. Chinese as the biggest socialist country in the world, although the long-term pursue selfless collectivism, but in the protection of public interests is not a legal system to protect. This not only behind the developed countries in Europe and America has lagged behind India and other developing countries, can not but arouse our attention.
Although there are many difficulties in establishing public interest litigation system in our country, but, as long as the pursuit of social justice force did not die, there is hope to break the ice. We should to establish public interest litigation system as an opportunity, to protect public interests are not infringed, ensuring that the people enjoy the right, be in power, the realization of national social individual rights (power) allocation, give full play to the regulating role of public interest litigation system, construction of the new socialist democracy, social justice, harmonious and a real sense of.

Reference.
[1] Jiang Hui. Chinese and foreign public interest litigation system in comparison to the [J]. business research and reference. 2004 (19)
[2] Ma Fengnan. Discussion on the establishment of public interest litigation system feasibility study of.2002 (10) [J]. trial
[3] Su Jiacheng, the army. Public interest litigation system on the law of [J]..2000 (10)
[4][] Monod Capet Letty. Access to justice and the welfare state [M]. translated by Wang Yaxin. Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law press, 1996
[5] weeks. On the Rome Nan (under) [M]. Beijing: the Commercial Press, 2001
[6] Han Zhihong, Ruan Daqiang. New litigation -- the public economic interest litigation theory and practice [M]. Beijing: Law Press, 1999
[7] Qinhua. German history of law development [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai people's publishing house, 1998
[8] Jiang Hui. Chinese and foreign public interest litigation system in comparison to the [J]. business research and reference. 2004 (19)
[9] Minjie. Group action on [J]. Journal of Guangxi University,.2004 (4)
[10] [M]. Qinhua America history of law development. Shanghai: Shanghai people's publishing house, 2000
[11] cattle plough cultivation. American public interest litigation system and Its Enlightenment of [J]..2005 Journal of Henan Public Security College (2)
[12] Chen Yehong, Tang Ming. Chinese and foreign legal system [M]. Beijing: the Commercial Press, 2000
[13] Shen Daming. Comparative Civil Procedure Law Theory [M]. Beijing: CITIC publishing house, 1991
[14] Yan Yunqiu. Public interest litigation idea research [M]. Beijing: China procuratorial press, 2002
[15] statutes. Private law research (foreword) [M]. Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law press, 2000