The mother earth is the fountain of all of living matter. Land is the most valuable natural resources. The arable land of land is specially precious. The arable land not only is the lifeblood of peasant, but also is the roots of the human being. However, we destroy it at second only to the power of nuclear burst at the moment.The acts that seriously violate the land management law have been criminalized by the Criminal Law of our country in force. It reflects the legislator fully recognize the seriousness of that kind of acts. And the legislator intentionally guards against and punishes these acts. However, in practice the Criminal Law appears incapable and can't be correctly applicable when it faces the ubiquitous law cases that village committee illegally approves housing lands and villagers illegally build houses in rural area. One of the causes is some scholars and some persons in practical circles have different even tit-for-tat opinions at some factors of these law cases. In fact, these cases are often dealed with as illegal cases or totally aren't punished. But I advocate many of these cases have been crimes ,they can't only be prosecuted for illegal responsibility but should be prosecuted for criminal responsibility. That's because the arable land is the lifeblood of the human being. We have to powerfully protect it with the Criminal Law having most punitive and deterrent.The case in this article is a representative of these cases, so to speak. In this article I report the summary,the details and the focus of the case. And I report five kinds of opinions about the case in detail that I concluded through investigation. Namely, the first opinion is that criminal liabilities of village committee and the directly responsible persons in this case should be penalized for the crime of illegally transferring land use right. The second opinion is that this case is a joint offence of the crime of illegally occupying agricultural land. The principal persons should be penalized: non-principal personals shouldn't be penalized because their plot is marked slight. The third opinion is that the village committee or the administrative village is a unit. They should be fined for the crime of illegally occupying agricultural land, and the persons who are directly in charge and the other persons who are directly responsible for the crime should be given criminal punishment. The forth opinion is that the director of the village committee should be given criminal punishment for the crime of illegally approving the requisition or occupation of land. The other 16 family villagers should be given administrative penalty because of their illegal occupation of land, but their action isn't the crime. The fifth opinion is that any of the four crimes about land in the Criminal Law can't be used to deal with the case. According to the principle of none can be convicted without clear legal rule, the case should be maintained as innocence. In the end, I report my opinion and viewpoint. Namely, in this case the administrative village is subject of crime of the unit crime. It and the persons in charge and the directly responsible persons should be penalized for criminal responsibility for the crime of illegally occupying agricultural land.I write the article hoping that we can avoid controversy like these about this case and that the article is an aid to the same justice. I hope the same cases can be treated as the same justice. The Criminal Law can powerfully punish the crimes of illegally occupying or destroying land in order to give land the strongest protection. |