The Changes Of Legislative Ideas Of House Expropriation And Compensation On State-owned Land

In January21,2011,“Regulation on the Expropriation of Buildings onState—owned Land and Compensation”(hereinafter referred to as Levy Regulations)was formulated by the State Council officially promulgated and implemented. Thedifference of legal provisions between the new “Levy Regulations” and “UrbanHousing Demolition Management Regulations”(hereinafter referred to asDemolition Regulations) which was promulgated in1991and2001, as well as theprogress of the legislation idea has become a focus of concern.This article attempts to find the difference between the1991and2001“Demolition Regulations” and “Levy Regulations”. By contrast, it found that theaspects that the maintenances of interests of the people are gradually strengthenedand the balance in the government power and the civil rights have made significantprogress. Through to analysis the different social and historical background thatformulated two “Demolition Regulations” and “Levy Regulations”, reflect thenecessity to promulgated “Levy Regulation”. The “Levy regulations” which appearsin the limits of power to public and private right maintenance mainly through thebody which is in charge of the levy, public interest, compensation price and theprocedure of requisition expression comes out. In order to testify the progress of the“Levy Regulation” in private right protection, the article illustrates it from differentaspects. It contains the highlight of the government’s main body status in the houserequisition, the limitation of the public interest, the different provisions of thecompensation standard and levy process in the three regulations and the influence tothe citizens and social.The “Levy Regulations” makes the government as the body which replaces theold regulation announced in2001which makes the body the demolition company.By the government as the body in charge, the government implemented the power toput forward the more rigorous procedural demand. It must abide the principles of publicity, fairness and justice. It should ask for public opinion before making thedecision in order to make the public has extensive participation right. Compare to theconduction that the government department make the requisition decision in separatein the before two “Demolition Regulations”, more with a democratic color.In the public interest, the terms of “Demolition Regulations” in1991and2001neither made the public interest as the necessary condition to release the housedismantlement license. The public interest and business interests can become thehouse dismantlement reason. Business interests in the case, the public powerintervenes the transaction between the private body and it support private rights toinfringe another part of private rights in legal. It violates the fair principal betweenthe equal subjects. The public interest as the elements for levy was established in“Levy Regulations”. The public interests of the persons affected by the expropriationwith the individual interests are unified. To avoid the private right suffer illegalviolations, the interests of the persons affected by the expropriation should beconsidered in the process of the development of the industrialization andurbanization. On the scope of public interest limits adopted a special type thatcombines a list and summary. The government expropriation operation space will beeffectively restricted in a minimum range. On the one hand to avoid a completeenumeration type may result in missing the other hand, it can also avoid the separateprovisions summarized too much principle.On the system of compensation,“Levy Regulations” insist such principle thatimprove the living conditions of the persons affected by the expropriation and makethe living standards will not reduce. The persons affected by the expropriation toobtain fair compensation. It clears the compensation standard and subsidies,incentives. The interests of persons affected by the expropriation will be protectedeffectively. In the process of compensation, the compensation price shall not be lessthan the market price of the similar real estate when the housing levy decisionannounced, in which include the housing land use fees. It changed the situation that“Demolition Regulations” only compensate the house does not compensate the land.In the price assessment aspect, on the price of real estate assessment unit selectionand assessment of the price objection mechanism have made specific provisions.Theperson who was levied have been given full rights to maintain the legitimate rights and interests. Compared with the two "Demolition Regulations", the other bigprogress on the "Levy Regulations" is to be levied on the survival right guarantee. Ifthe person affected by the expropriation to comply with the conditions of the housingsecurity, the government should arrange him to have the priority to enjoy the housingsecurity that make him no longer waiting for waiting.The procedural aspects of the “levy Regulations” have increased the strength ofpublic participation. In the process of housing levy, citizen should be compensatedfirst and then be relocated, prohibit the construction of units involved in therelocation. Cancel government departments in two “Demolition Regulations” thecompulsion relocation power. In the “demolition Regulations” on implementationprocess, demolition progress and the interest of construction unit is closely related. Ifthe compensation consensus cannot be reached, the government sector will make thedecision. The government departments, as issued a demolition permit a party, maytend to the demolition side to make demolition work carried out smoothly. Aftergovernment made the decision, the demolition man can implement the demolitionwithout compensating for the displaced people. In addition, regardless of theadministrative review or litigation that the displaced residents might have filedagainst the decision on demolition, the demolition enforcement would be carried outnonetheless. It seriously violates the interests of the displaced people."LevyRegulations" achieve a balance between public power and private rights throughimproving the levy procedure which is more focused on the civil rights safeguard.The full text study from the legislation, compare the changes of the allocationof the public power and private rights in the process of evolution of housing levy andcompensation system. The study from the legal aspects extends to the socialdimension. Changes in the legal provisions reflect the changes in the legislativeconcept. The different social influence was caused by the different regulationsimplementing. Showing the new "Levy Regulations" contains the new legal spiritand practical value.