Let's start with a few basics:
1. The contract was signed in 2004, the contract period is 30 years, and the contract payment will be paid in 2022. In the contract, the land is pasture land and not arable land. In 2018, during the third land survey, the plot was changed from pasture land to cultivated land. There is a very important link here that is not clearly explained, that is, in the process of farmers' transformation of the plot, whether the village and town levels have allocated funds for the transformation of the plot.
2. In the 6 years since 2018, it is unknown whether the two parties have communicated about the nature of the plot and the fees.
2. After Kailu County was identified as a "pilot unit for the efficient use of new cultivated land", the contracted farmers were required to pay the difference of 200 yuan per mu, which belonged to the price difference between pasture land and cultivated land.
4. This is not the only family in the local area that has this situation, and some people have already paid the fees.
Public Notices
Let me first talk about the correct way to deal with it as an official: 1. Negotiation, 2. If the negotiation fails, go through the litigation procedure, 3. Request enforcement, 4. Get back payment. In rural China, most of the households have completed the whole process after the first step (in fact, there are indeed farmers in Kailu County who pay supplementary fees), but the target area of this household has reached more than 5,000 mu, and at 200 yuan per mu, 1 million yuan is needed. I often go to the rural areas in the central and western regions, and generally as long as the fee exceeds 5,000 yuan, the farmers pay it in installments, and it is rare to pay it off at once, and the village-level units will not forcibly pursue it. An important reason for this conflict should be that the contracted farmers have clearly expressed their unwillingness to make up the payment, and in addition, the dissatisfaction of some other farmers who have already paid the fees must have also played a considerable role, and it is not difficult to imagine that it is very likely that someone has overstepped the level and reported to the competent department at the county level, so the town level will come forward to carry out the law so vigorously.
The town level stepped forward
So as the competent departments at all levels of villages, towns, and counties, is it reasonable to let the peasants pay the fees? This first depends on what is the mutual agreement in the 2004 contract, that is, whether the government departments have the right to change and interpret the contract, and if so, then there is a basis for the existence of the "change of situation." Secondly, in the land transformation we talked about earlier, whether the third-level competent departments also have input, and if so, there are objective conditions for making up the fees. Here I would like to share some of my observations: judging from the fact that other farmers have already paid back their fees, I can surmise that both of the above points should exist. As for the form and nature of the investment in land renovation, because there are too few public disclosures, we cannot be sure, and given the close proximity of Shuangsheng Village to the Xinkai River, I suspect that this investment is most likely due to the laying of water networks.
Shuangsheng Village
Of course, just by looking at the circular, you may have the illusion that the competent authorities at the town level did not come forward to enforce the lawsuit as to why both parties to the lawsuit were villagers? What does this have to do with the villagers? In fact, it is not difficult to understand, and I do not need to explain. In addition, at present, if the village, town and county levels want to receive supplementary payments, they can only go through the judicial procedure, because the matter has already become a hot spot, and it is definitely not possible to continue to use force. What's more, it is certain to win by going through the judicial process, but it is just time-consuming and laborious. Once the judgment is rendered, given that the contracted farmers have already paid all the contract money, there is no room for reversal, and there is almost no suspense in paying 1 million yuan.
Plough the floor
Finally, I would like to make two points about my thoughts on this incident:
First, front-line leading cadres in rural areas should not use brute force to deal with specific problems, and it is very foolish to use brute force to intensify contradictions. The vast majority of peasants in China do not want to cause trouble, and only want to do a good job of their own one-acre and one-third of land, so even in the face of authority at the village level, they can give in, let alone at the town or county level. The contract fee for the plot has been paid in a lump sum, and there is no risk that the payment will not be paid for any level of competent department, so we can take our time, we can be reasonable, and if it doesn't work, we can also go through the channel of litigation, and it is impossible to say how to hinder planting! Take 10,000 steps back, you can't get anything if you don't plant it, and what you grow may be able to offset the supplementary payment, so why make a win-win thing a lose-lose situation?
corn
Second, China is still in a period of rapid social and economic development, so there is a great risk in signing long-term contracts. Similar to this kind of contracts over 30 years, the contract period is bound to be larger than the policy period, and policy changes are almost certain to occur during the contract period. Moreover, as far as the current situation in China is concerned, there are deficiencies in all aspects, whether it is contract enforcement, guarantees, follow-up compensation, judicial clause changes, etc., there are various hidden risks. So in my opinion, this kind of ultra-long-term contract (including bonds) has to be signed very carefully, because there are many things that you can neither see nor anticipate.
The illustrations in this article come from the Internet, the copyright belongs to the original author, if you need to delete the original picture because of copyright issues, please contact me through private messages as soon as possible, and I will try my best to cooperate with all actions to protect the copyright of the original author!