China's Collective Land Ownership, Legal Analysis

Although there has been lots of disputes on the nature of the ownership of collective land including the viewpoint of general ownership and the viewpoint of unusual share ownership, the viewpoint of corporate ownership, etc. but there is still not a final conclusion or usual viewpoint. This assay tries to use my knowledge in political economy, and with historical and positive methods to examining and to analyze the concept of collectivity and the ownership of collective land, the history and the current status of the ownership of collective land, put forward my opinion on the nature of the ownership of collective land as well as the thinking way of perfecting the ownership of collective land. This assay is composed of three parts: Foreword, text (five chapters), and conclusion Chapter I Trimming general concept. The concept of the ownership of collective land, different from the concept in conventional civil law, is an objective right in China set up for different ownership bodies. It is sourced from the ownership of collective land of Marxism political economy, a product of ideology. For these reasons, it is necessary to discuss the word "collectivity", the body of the ownership of collective land, and the relationship between ownership system and ownership. For the word of "collectivity", there is still not yet a scientific and reasonable definition from linguist. Yet, jurisconsults have different opinions in the concept of "collectivity", some say it is a legal person organization, some believe it can be defined as a legal person, or a partner organization. In political economy, there are different meanings for collectivity", some mean the state, while some mean people organization. The author believes it does not coincide with the requirement of legal science to identify the body of ownership with an abstract and indeterminate word. On "ownership" and "ownership system". The view that "Ownership is a legal form of ownership system" takes the leading position in the law circle of China. It is general opinion of Chinese scholars that real right law is the legislation on ownership system or the legislation reflecting ownership system. This assay queries to this view. According to Marx's statement, ownership system is an economic base category, while ownership is a superstructural category. But in Stalin's view, ownership is ownership system. The two views are quite different, and which one is right is still disputable in political economy. It is better to abandon the view that ownership system determines ownership before we understand which one is right. The indeterminateness of the concept of "Ownership of collective land", together with the influence of ideology, makes it difficult to give a convincible explanation to itself. This assay fails to define collective land ownership, the reason of which is not a scientific concept of civil law. Chapter II The history and the background of the ownership of collective land in China. The ownership of land in Chinese countryside has the following stages: Land Reform, Cooperative Group, Junior Cooperative Commune, Senior Cooperative Commune, and the People's Commune. The collective land ownership evolves from the advanced cooperative commune in 1956. In 1982, Constitution first announced the land in countryside and suburb belonged to collectivity in the form of constitution. The "General Rule of the Civil Law" first listed the land of collectivity as" Protected property" in the first time in 1986. There are its deep historical backgrounds in the formulation of collective land ownership. The strategy of priority in developing heavy industry requires agriculture to provide the capital for national industrialization. Besides agricultural tax revenue, the other mean is the state monopoly for purchase and sail. Purchasing grain from individual farmers is very difficult that caused the relationship between peasant and the government strained. In 1954, there is a trend of grain, i.e., every body was concerned in purchasing grain. It seemed there was a need...