Administrative accountability system to be established at the city and county levels for illegal and irregular land expropriation
The Draft Amendment to the Land Administration Law (hereinafter referred to as the draft), which has drawn widespread attention from all sectors of society, was submitted today for the first time to the Standing Committee of the 11th National People's Congress for deliberation. This is the fourth revision since the current Land Administration Law was promulgated and implemented, and the focus of this revision is the compensation system for the expropriation of rural collective land.
Song Dahan, Director of the Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council, said when explaining the draft that the reform of the rural land management system is of major importance and involves many issues, some of which are still being explored and tested. In accordance with the principle of being proactive and prudent, it is better to solve them step by step. The most prominent current problem is that in land expropriation compensation work there are imperfect expropriation procedures, deficiencies in the statutory compensation methods, standards that are too low and provisions that are too rigid, and insufficient safeguards for the long-term livelihood of farmers whose land is expropriated. In some places, illegal and irregular land expropriation and the forcible or arbitrary seizure of farmers' land occur from time to time, becoming an important issue affecting social stability.
In order to solve these problems, the leading group for the revision of the Land Administration Law believes that a two-step approach should be taken: first concentrate on revising Article 47 of the current Land Administration Law, which sets out the land expropriation compensation system, and after the amendment to the Land Administration Law is adopted, the State Council will formulate regulations.
Song Dahan said that Article 47 of the current Land Administration Law provides: where land is expropriated, compensation shall be given according to the original use of the expropriated land; the compensation fees for expropriated cultivated land include land compensation fees, resettlement subsidies, and compensation fees for attachments on the land and young crops; and the total of land compensation fees and resettlement subsidies shall not exceed 30 times the average annual output value of the land in the three years before expropriation. With the rapid advance of industrialization and urbanization, these provisions have gradually exposed some problems: from the perspective of compensation principles, compensation based on multiples of annual output value on the basis of original use does not comprehensively take into account factors other than land output value, including land location, supply and demand relationships, and the role of land in providing employment and social security for farmers. From the perspective of compensation standards, the upper limit providing that the total of land compensation fees and resettlement subsidies shall not exceed 30 times the annual output value is too rigid. In recent years, many places have generally raised land expropriation compensation standards, breaking through the statutory upper limit of 30 times. From the perspective of compensation content, there is no provision for social security costs for farmers whose land is expropriated, and it needs to be linked with the provisions of the Property Law that “where collective-owned land is expropriated, social security costs for the farmers whose land is expropriated shall be arranged in accordance with law.” In light of the common practice in various places of providing separate compensation for villagers' residences, it is also necessary to separate villagers' residences from attachments and clearly provide for separate compensation in law.
The draft deletes the current Article 47 provision on compensation based on multiples of annual output value on the basis of original use, and amends it to provide that fair compensation shall be given for the expropriation of land collectively owned by farmers, ensuring that the original living standards of farmers whose land is expropriated are improved, their long-term livelihood is safeguarded, and their lawful rights and interests are protected.
Song Dahan explained that most market economy countries take fair compensation as the basic principle of land expropriation compensation. Although the wording differs, including fair compensation, due compensation, just compensation, reasonable compensation, and full compensation, the general requirement is compensation according to the market price of the land at the time of expropriation or the market price of similar nearby land. At the current stage in China, the rural land market has not yet taken shape, and the principle of fair compensation is mainly reflected in the land compensation standards, which must take into account multiple factors such as land location, supply and demand relationships, and the level of economic and social development, especially the factor of social security for farmers whose land is expropriated. In compensation for housing and attachments on the land, market principles are followed.
In addition, the draft adds specific content on social security compensation. On the basis of the three types of compensation provided in Article 47 of the current Land Administration Law, namely land compensation, resettlement subsidies, and compensation for young crops and attachments on the land, the draft lists housing separately from attachments on the land and adds social security compensation, providing that land expropriation compensation includes land compensation, resettlement subsidies and social security costs for farmers whose land is expropriated, compensation for rural villagers' residences, and other compensation for attachments on the land and compensation for young crops.
Song Dahan said that the draft adds some content, such as formulating strict land expropriation procedures in accordance with the principles of legality, fairness, and openness, and providing that where compensation funds are not in place, land expropriation shall not be approved or implemented. When formulating administrative regulations, the State Council initially considered that, in accordance with the principles and systems provided in the amendment, it would refine and strictly enforce land expropriation procedures, strengthen constraints on government land expropriation conduct, ensure the right of farmers whose land is expropriated to participate and have a voice before approval and during implementation, adhere to “compensation and resettlement first, land expropriation afterward,” clarify the right of farmers whose land is expropriated to apply for administrative reconsideration or bring administrative litigation, and establish an administrative accountability system for illegal and irregular land expropriation by city and county governments.