Forcibly demolishing while losing lawsuits, repeatedly losing lawsuits and forcibly demolishing, where is the law placed?
Infographic.
The bloody case of forced demolition in Luohe District, which has previously aroused great public concern, ushered in a follow-up, and the demolished household Wang Enzhong sued the Government of Luohe District for illegal forced demolition recently. According to media reports, this is one of dozens of local administrative litigation cases in recent years against the district government for forced demolition. According to a number of judgments, the court has ruled that the Government of Chencheng District has forced demolition to violate the law, and the government has lost the case many times.
The strange thing is that although the district government has lost many lawsuits, the forced demolition has never stopped. Even after the villagers' first house was convicted of illegal forced demolition, the administrative compensation case was still in progress, and the second house was forcibly demolished. The forced demolition move of the Chencheng District Government while losing the lawsuit is also considered to be suspected of "exchanging illegal time for time", and in order to promote the expropriation process, it will not hesitate to use illegal and violent methods to solve the problem.
In recent years, with the gradual improvement of the relevant systems and laws regulating demolition and relocation behavior, the term "forced demolition" has gradually moved away from the public eye. However, judging from the dozens of administrative litigation cases related to demolition and relocation in the localities involved in recent years, forced demolition has not completely disappeared.
Different from the background of previous forced demolitions, many local forced demolitions occurred when the local government was judged to be illegal by the court, that is, "while losing the lawsuit, while forcibly demolishing", which is even more regrettable.
It is reasonable to say that in the context of "comprehensively deepening the rule of law", the local court has repeatedly ruled that the district government has forcibly demolished the law, and the local grass-roots government should take over. Judging from the actual effect, these rulings sometimes do not effectively curb the hand of forced demolition, and the protection of the rights and interests of demolition households has not been improved as expected.
This is mainly manifested in three points. First, the compensation standards determined by dozens of administrative compensation judgments are generally lower than the amount of compensation. This has made a considerable number of villagers "win the lawsuit but lose money"; second, on the one hand, the court constantly determines that the local government's forced demolition is illegal, but on the other hand, the forced demolition behavior is still "going their own way"; third, behind the repeated failures and demolitions, few local officials are held accountable.
It is not difficult to see that the amount of compensation is not as good as the amount of compensation, and the investigation of illegal responsibility is suspended, which has become the basis for the local government to force demolition while losing the lawsuit.
According to the law, the compensation after forced demolition cannot be lower than the compensation for legal expropriation - from the legal level, administrative compensation and compensation are "subrogations" for losses caused by administrative acts to the legitimate rights and interests of administrative counterparts, but the former corresponds to legal administrative acts, and the latter corresponds to illegal administration.
In order to reflect the punishment for illegal expropriation and illegal demolition, and to effectively safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, the law clearly requires that the compensation should not be less than the compensation that should be obtained due to the lawful expropriation, that is, it should not be lower than the market value of similar houses in the reconstructed lot or nearby lot at the time of compensation.
It is conceivable that when villagers protect their rights and interests through legal channels, but even if they win the lawsuit, they cannot bring about a "sense of gain" in the substantive sense, and when the actual binding force of legal rulings on local illegal demolition is still weak, it is difficult for the wheel of forced demolition to stop on its own.
In recent years, the local forced demolition chaos has been exposed repeatedly, and "the villagers were dragged into the car and thrown home in the suburbs and the house was gone" Is almost a common practice, I am afraid that it is related to this.
It is worth mentioning that a local internal address book of the transformation headquarters shows that the staff of the headquarters comes from 21 units such as the district government, the people's congress, the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, the court, the procuratorate, and the public security bureau, including nearly 500 public officials. However, in 2018, the Ministry of Public Security explicitly prohibited public security police from participating in non-police activities such as land requisition and demolition, and required that those who arbitrarily use police forces to participate in forced demolition and relocation cause serious consequences, and seriously investigate the responsibility of relevant personnel.
In addition, at the beginning of 2016, the Notice on Further Regulating the Expropriation and Demolition of Houses issued by the General Office of the Henan Provincial Government clearly stipulates that all parts of the province strictly enforce the procedures for requisitioning and demolishing, put an end to illegal forced demolition, and strictly prohibit violent demolition; public opinions should be solicited before demolition; and the responsibility of relevant personnel should be seriously investigated for those who have orders that do not work, who have prohibitions, who do not stop illegal requisition and demolition, conceal and do not report, and do not investigate the case.
From 2016 to 2019, the phenomenon of "forcibly demolishing while losing the case" in the district has been going on. In the end, which link is the problem, it is obvious that the timely intervention and investigation of the higher level of government, and timely give a fair answer to the demolition and relocation people, and also maintain the authority of the implementation of the relevant system.
In any case, the consequences of forced demolition and illegality should not be limited to a "losing" ruling statement, but must be based on the actual pursuit of responsibility, implemented in the strong correction of illegal acts, and reflected in the rights and interests of demolition residents. The phenomenon of forced demolition while losing lawsuits and forcibly demolishing while "administering according to law" should no longer exist.
□ Min Xiao (Media Person)
Editor: Ma Xiaolong Proofreader: Li Lijun