To see an article about the land system in the land and resources on the Internet (author: Yu Chiming). Some ideas of collective land (such as the collective land according to the needs of development and planning requirements, can completely from the agricultural land into construction land in city. Operating land land to rural collective purchase, leasing of land use rights......) I don't agree. But the article changes on land system is very clear.

   One, since the previous "constitution" of the land regulations

   In 1954 the "constitution", "mineral water, the provisions prescribed by law for state-owned forests, land and other resources, are all belong to the whole people." Article eighth stipulates: "the state in accordance with the law to protect farmers from the land ownership and the ownership of the means of production." The provisions of article thirteenth: "countries in need of public interest, in accordance with the law of the conditions, the purchase, requisitioned or nationalization of rural land and other production data."

   In 1975 the "constitution" sixth article: "mineral, water, state-owned forests, land and other resources, are all belong to the whole people." "Countries can under conditions prescribed by law, to purchase, requisitioned or nationalization of rural land and other production data."

   In 1978 the "constitution" stipulates: "the state owned forest, mineral, water, land and other land resources, are all belong to the whole people." "Countries can be in accordance with the law of the conditions, the purchase of land, expropriation or nationalization." In 1982 the "constitution" stipulates that the ninth: "natural resources and mineral, water, forests, mountains, grassland, uncultivated land, beaches and other areas, belong to all countries, namely the ownership by the whole people; by law belongs to all of forests and mountains, grassland, wasteland, except for the beach." Rule tenth: "city of the land belongs to the state", "land in rural areas and the outskirts of the city, as stipulated by relevant laws other than those owned by the state, all belonging to the collective; house sites and private plots, remain mountain oneself, also belong to the collective." "Countries in need of public interest, may requisition land for its use in accordance with the law." "No organization or individual may encroach upon, the sale, lease or other forms of illegal transfer of land." "All organizations and individuals using land must make."

   A 1993 amendment to the fourth paragraph tenth: "no organization or individual may encroach upon, the sale, lease or other forms of illegal transfer of land." Is amended as: "no organization or individual may encroach upon, the sale or other forms of illegal transfer of land. The right to the use of land may be transferred according to law." Need to adapt for the use of state-owned land, increase the "land use rights can be transferred in accordance with the provisions of the" law of the.

   The 2004 amendments to the "national needs in the public interest, may requisition land for its use in accordance with the law." To "countries in need of public interest, can expropriate the land and give compensation in accordance with the law." On the "expropriation" and "expropriation" distinction, and stressed that "compensation".

   Two, the current "contradiction" provisions of the constitution of the land

   In 1982 the "constitution" in 1954 "constitution" is the basis of the state-owned land, the definition, the first three "constitution" only stipulates: "the mineral, water, state-owned forest, wasteland" belong to the whole people, not from the angle of regional announced that all city land into state-owned land. And in 1982 the "constitution" in addition to the provisions of "natural resources and mineral, water, forests, mountains, grassland, uncultivated land, beaches and other areas, belong to all countries, namely the ownership by the whole people", the first announced the "city of the land belongs to the state". The problem lies in the "qualifier city", city limits is not like the scope of natural resource to be fixed, but with the process of changing city. "City of the land belongs to the state" means the city expanded to where, where state-owned land to expand, expand the city if the occupation of rural collective land, we must take the rural collective land into state-owned land through expropriation. In this way, and "countries in need of public interest, can expropriate conflicts" in accordance with the law on land. The reason lies in the city, the development of rural collective land occupied by "all is not out of the need of public interests". So, how many non - "the need of public interest" of the new land, the industrial land, commercial operation of production such as land come from? Countries to the needs of public welfare expropriation itself is not the problem, the purpose and scope of state expropriation of property restrictions is most countries practice. Since the "constitution" provisions of the state in the public interest needs to land expropriation, it shows that, both the land for the public interest, is not in the interest of the public land, and non - "public interest" land is not through the acquisition made, otherwise it is against the "constitution". In fact the city non "public interest" new land can only use the rural collective land, this would violate the "city of the land belongs to all countries" constitution "regulation". According to the "constitution" requirements, the city non "public interest" for new land through expropriation was neither, nor the use of rural collective land, this will inevitably cause the city "to" non public interest of new land is not the source of the results. In a word, in accordance with the provisions of the "constitution" of the needs of public interests, the new city non, through expropriation unconstitutional, not through expropriation is unconstitutional, "constitution", this is the inherent contradiction of regulations about land ownership and expropriation system. In other words, the new city of non public interest need land is not the source of the.

   Three, to solve the "constitution" inherent contradiction of land system approach

   "The constitution" is the fundamental law of the state, the provisions on land which is an extremely important factor of production has its inner contradiction can not be tolerated. Analysis of the causes of this conflict, is mainly caused by the planned economy ideology. In the guidance of the concept of planned economy, state-owned land and rural collective land two property right is not equal, the rural collective land can be levied for the state-owned land, the use right of state-owned land into construction land market, the collective land use right a few cases in addition to the provisions of law, can not be sold, transferred or leased for non agricultural construction. Of course, in fact, land management and land expropriation legislation practice and not in accordance with the "constitution" spirit to do, city new land actually through the feature, the actual need far more than the city development (according to the conditions of our country, a million population city land should be in control of about 100 square kilometers, and a national clearing all types zone 6015, which approved by the State Council and the provincial government of only 1818, accounting for 30.2%; the other 4197 are provincial development zone. Since 1997, the Development Zone Planning from 12000 square kilometres of land to expand to 36000 square kilometers, 2 times the increase in 6 years, has exceeded the total land area of existing national urban construction.). To solve this contradiction, there are only two ways, one way to further strengthen the planning economy, whether it is in the public interest needs, still need to non public interest, countries can expropriate the land in accordance with the law. This is since the reform development consistent so operating practices, but also against the "constitution" approach. We also see caused by indiscriminate land requisition right against the interests of farmers and food security threat. Obviously this approach is difficult to continue. The second way is to change the concept of planned economy, city land may not need to rule all the land of state-owned land, "the constitution" not from the geographical space of city land belongs to the state provisions. Property rights are a bundle of rights including right to use, right, transfer right, to recognize and protect the peasant collective land use rights, income rights, the right to transfer. Collective land according to the needs of development and planning requirements, can completely from the agricultural land into construction land in city. Operating land land to rural collective purchase, leasing of land use rights, countries should do for land use planning and land use control, the protection of arable land and food security. From the practice of innovation developed coastal areas, in order to alleviate the contradiction with the farmers, the land and cut out the part gives the farmer to the development and promotion. Since the farmers collective land can give him a part to develop business, why can't we all by farmers to develop the business. This does not have any obstacles in technology.

   Therefore, suggest starting procedure of constitutional amendment as soon as possible, the abolition of the "city land belongs to the state all the terms", but specific to which land is the state ownership and collective ownership, according to the actual situation, the legal registration. If you do not modify the "constitution" clause, so there is only one way, not only can be used to, and does not violate the constitution spirit "". This is the revised land management law, the farmers collective land can enter the non-agricultural construction land market in accordance with the law, but these land nominally not designated as city downtown. The proposed legislation, a clear definition of the scope of the state in the public interest in land expropriation and requisition, while allowing the farmers collective land in accordance with the law can enter the non-agricultural construction land market. So in the process of city, city of new non public interest land to the legitimate source. Otherwise, to maintain the status quo, the land management departments at all levels of government, under the constitution. Not to be unconstitutional, "constitution" clause makes is a mere scrap of paper, no authority and seriousness.

Reference.

Xu Chongde: the "constitution" is based on the 1954 "constitution", "Chinese people" in 2002 fifteenth

The management of people's Republic of China land. ""

The reform of land expropriation system in China, Professor Zhou Qiren (on) -- "the reform of land expropriation system." Chinese International Conference two