| Scholars have opened fire on a new draft regulation amendment on the demolition of urban housing, saying a stipulation that permits the destruction of homes for "non-public interests" is in violation of the country's Constitution.
The amendment, which was made public on Friday, is being criticized for its No 40 item, which says "to demolish housing for constructions of non-public interest, the constructors, such as real estate developers, need to ask permission from related governments".
Ma Guangyuan, a researcher with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said this stipulation should be deleted as both the Constitution and the draft revision itself stipulate that "the government can only confiscate citizens' property for public interest".
The draft revision, which is progress from the original in that it emphasizes public interest, could be ruined by this single item, Ma said. This stipulation still authorizes the government to permit demolitions for non-public interests.
China's feverish real estate market has stoked developers' appetite for land. The existing regulation on urban housing demolition, allowing local governments to confiscate homes and claim land, has sparked growing violence and even prompted some protesters to set themselves on fire.
"If the new guidelines do not make real changes concerning this part, the draft revision is just a technical instead of a real change to the original one," said Wang Xixin, a professor from Peking University, who also disagrees with this stipulation.
Wang said the State Council Legislative Affairs Office had informed him that they would issue another regulation about demolishing for non-public interest. However, no date for its publication has been given.
"I suggested the deletion of this guideline too but they didn't do it," Wang said.
The law ought to make clear: You cannot confiscate land if the purpose behind it is not "public interest," Wang said.
"If non-public interest demolitions are specifically outlawed, then the property owner and the developer would have to work out a selling price between themselves, in a civil agreement, and the government would not even get involved. Government officials are not supposed to permit anything."
Also, the No 28 guideline was attacked as being unfair to house owners as it stipulates "those who disagree with the compensation deal can sue, yet during the lawsuit, the compensation could still be executed."
The original regulation permits forced relocation before compensation, and now they can also force relocation after paying money, said Jiang Ming'an, a law professor from Peking University.
Villagers and officials clash over road dispute in Jiangsu province
About a dozen women, most older than 80, camped in a tent next to a disputed village road in Jiangsu province for two days last week to protest "forced land acquisition".
The women, from Sanyou village, Dongkan town, in Binhai county, said a local company was attempting to acquire a stretch of road, which leads to the nearest market, China News Service reported.
The report said the company had reached an agreement with the local government and villagers to take over 1.8 hectares of land in Sanyou village to set up its workshops.
The company's factory and land on which the workshops will be built are separated by a road, which the company was attempting to acquire, the report said.
It added that a new road was built some distance away but villagers using this route took far longer to reach the market to buy daily provisions.
To prevent the company from acquiring the road, a group of women, some of them severely sick, set up a tent alongside the road and began camping last Thursday.
The People's Daily website reported that villagers clashed with "300 local officials and police, who went to the site to remove the women on Friday.
The local government resolved the dispute with the villagers on Saturday and all the women returned home.
A Dongkan government official said the problem had been settled. He did not say if the company had given up its attempt to acquire the road. |
