Three bottom lines for land reform: which one is the most urgent?
Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee, presided over the seventh meeting of the Central Leading Group for Comprehensively Deepening Reforms on the 2nd. The meeting reviewed the "Opinions on the Pilot Work for Reform of Rural Land Expropriation, Entry of Collective Operational Construction Land into the Market, and the Homestead System." The meeting pointed out that the three bottom lines must be upheld: the public ownership nature of land must not be changed, the red line for cultivated land must not be breached, and farmers' interests must not be harmed, and that rural land system reform should be advanced in an orderly manner on the basis of pilot projects. (See page A4 for related reports.)
The "three bottom lines" will become rigid principles that must be upheld in the next step of rural land system reform and directional requirements that guide and deepen the reform. Fundamentally speaking, the "public ownership nature of land" should undoubtedly be the most important bottom line and the one that must not be breached. If this bottom line were breached, many legal systems would need to be revised. Conversely, as long as these legal systems are not revised, it is impossible for the bottom line that land is public-owned to be breached.
Our country is the most populous country in the world, and the red line for cultivated land is undoubtedly also a bottom line that absolutely must not be breached. Breaching the red line for cultivated land means that grain production will encounter problems. Even if this could potentially be solved through grain imports, the hidden dangers left behind would be impossible to resolve.
That being said, the third bottom line, "farmers' interests must not be harmed," seems to be a relatively secondary bottom line. But judging from the current actual situation, ensuring that farmers' interests are not harmed is in fact the most urgent bottom line in rural land system reform, one that absolutely must not be breached, and it is also a major key to whether rural land system reform can be advanced in depth.
On the issue of rural land system reform, "the public ownership nature of land must not be changed" is a bottom line that no one dares to touch or breach; and as for the "red line for cultivated land," because there is strict approval system checks, and strict constraints from land-use quotas and land-use plans, it is very difficult for anyone to breach it if they wanted to. Only the bottom line that "farmers' interests must not be harmed" lacks strict and complete legal provisions and also lacks rigorous and powerful institutional safeguards, so the possibility of its being breached is very high.
In recent years, in areas such as rural land expropriation, rural land development, and rural land construction, where has there not been a situation harming farmers' interests? And in how many places have farmers' interests truly been placed in the most important position in land expropriation, land development, and land construction? In many places, all kinds of contradictions and problems surrounding land expropriation, land development, and land construction can be seen everywhere, and have even triggered large-scale mass incidents and vicious cases.
In the course of the new round of rural land system reform, while adhering to the "three bottom lines," it is necessary to place the principle that farmers' interests must not be harmed in the most important position and to implement and guarantee it. First, when formulating relevant policies and systems, it is necessary to fully consider the actual situation of farmers, consider farmers' needs, proceed more from the perspective of safeguarding farmers' interests, and formulate policies in a way that is relatively favorable to farmers, rather than leaving loopholes unfavorable to farmers at the very beginning of introducing systems and policies.
Second, in aspects such as compensation standards, compensation methods, and transfer procedures, it is necessary to uphold the principles of fairness, justice, openness, and transparency, formulate standards as reasonably as possible, formulate compensation methods as scientifically as possible, and formulate transfer procedures as transparently as possible, so that farmers can understand them and can calculate the accounts clearly, rather than having everything decided by the government and enterprises. It is necessary to keep channels for appeals open. Governments at all levels must seriously accept and seriously handle farmers' appeals on issues of land system reform, and ensure that farmers' appeals are not intercepted midway.
Third, in the process of land transfer and expropriation, it is necessary to extensively listen to farmers' opinions, explain policies clearly, explain the benefits thoroughly, and explain compensation methods and other matters completely, so that most farmers can accept them. When most farmers have not accepted them, no locality, department, or unit may forcibly transfer or expropriate land; otherwise, the responsibility of the relevant leading cadres and staff must be pursued, and if serious consequences are caused, criminal responsibility must also be pursued.
In short, all "three bottom lines" of rural land system reform must be guaranteed and must not be breached, but at present the bottom line that "farmers' interests must not be harmed" especially requires all parties to attach great importance to it, and it must absolutely not be breached by relying on power, causing farmers to question and worry about rural land system reform.