【作者】 程雪阳；

【导师】 沈开举；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 当下中国是一个矛盾多发期,但源自土地领域的矛盾似乎尤为激烈和广泛,由此也导致了各种社会关系的紧张。本论文试图回答“为什么中国土地领域中的矛盾和社会冲突越来越多,越来越激烈”这一问题。从直观上来说,征收权被一些地方政府滥用似乎是最合适的答案,但如果透过纷繁复杂的表象,人们就会发现,各种矛盾的发生往往与土地产权的模糊不清、不平等,土地管理的失范(越位或缺位)有关。从公法视角探寻中国土地产权和土地管理制度中存在的问题,并以此为基础揭示隐藏在中国土地制度种种乱象背后的秘密正是本论文的核心任务。虽然今天的中国人对中国共产党不同时期的土地政策非常了解,但对以下所有权-使用权谱系变化却似乎十分陌生：即在不同的“集体化”或者“被集体化”阶段——初级社、高级社、人民公社以及后人民公社时代,农村的土地产权制度是如何从“私有私用”,到“私有共用”,到“按份共有共用”再发展到“抽象公有公用”的。城市土地如何一步步“被国有化”以及如何理解和解释这种土地国有化,似乎也很少引起人们的关注。正文的第一部分梳理了1921年《中国共产党宣言》公布以来中国土地产权领域所发生的重要制度变迁。通过使用“权利-义务”和“意识形态-社会现实”两个分析框架,我们既可以看到过去90年间中国土地产权在法律层面上所发生的变化,也可以找到中国土地产权制度发生如此多变的原因。频繁变换的历史并非是土地矛盾和冲突产生的惟一原因,现行宪法和法律所建立的特殊土地产权制度也难辞其咎。正文的第二部分将从中国现行宪法第10条的规定出发,分析现行法律体系所建立的“国有土地”与“集体土地”两种土地产权制度。在这一部分中,我将着重从“权利-义务”这一框架探究那些被现有研究遗忘或者遮蔽的问题,并揭示土地产权制度内部所存在的紧张与冲突,以及某些违背法学常识的结论之所以长期被视为真理的秘密。人们将会看到,中国现行的宪法和法律非但没有清晰界定两种土地产权制度的关系,也没有明确回答“何为农民集体”,“何为农民集体所有土地”,“何为城市”,“何为国家”,“何为土地国家所有”以及“谁能代表国家”等等问题。现行宪法还在“土地国有化”和“土地城市化”之间建立了一种错误的联系,这导致中国大陆走上了公民土地权利受损,城市无序扩张的畸形发展道路。土地管理领域中存在的问题也不容忽视。1998年以后中国大陆建立了号称“世界上最严格的土地管理制度”,并希望籍此制度实现耕地保护、国有土地资本化和城市化之间的平衡。然而,耕地流失带来的恐惧遮蔽了人们的双眼,国有土地资本化带来的欣喜迷离了人们的视线。制度决策者希望在相互冲突的目标之间找到平衡,却没有对已经变化了的中央与地方关系保持必要的敏感,也没有认真对待计划经济向市场经济转轨所带来的巨大挑战,而是轻易地动用了国家作为土地管理者的权力来维护国家作为国有土地所有权人的利益。所以不但无法实现制度设计之初的目标,也让整个社会付出了沉重的代价。探讨这种缺陷及其带来的问题正是第三部分需要解决的问题。另外,系统评价过去90年间中国土地领域所发生的种种制度变迁也是本部分的重要任务之一。如何能在错综复杂的“地权迷宫”中找到出路?论文的最后一个部分将在立宪主义精神的指引下,通过“权利.义务”这一分析框架,绘制一幅中国土地产权制度和土地管理制度的“改革路线图”。这幅“路线图”以坚持社会主义市场经济道路为坐标,从建立平等的土地产权制度的改革开始,通过建立统一的土地市场,完善土地规划与用途管制制度,督促政府克制行使征收征用权以及加强公共参与等五个步骤最终绘制完成。仅仅满足于坐而论道是一种不负责任的表现,我们还必须寻找行而有效的办法。在具体的制度变迁路径方面,本文认为,应当允许地方在符合自由民主理念的前提下,制定和实施“违宪但有效”的地方性法规,这不仅是因为地方差异巨大的中国正处于改革和发展阶段,更是因为地方民众(可以通过其代表)才是地方事务最终决定者。在论文的最后一个部分,我将借助加拿大的“但书条款”模式来反思“良性违宪论”,进而从“宪政对话”的视角对制度变迁与法律秩序(特别是宪法秩序)之间的关系进行重新梳理和论证。通过这种理论的建构,我希望为中国土地制度乃至整个法律制度的变革实践提供一套新的话语,并以这套话语为基础,缓解制度变迁与法律秩序之间的内在紧张和焦虑。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation aims to answer the issue that "Why the social conflicts due to land issues are increasingly and becoming more intense in modern China."The answer appears to be the power of expropriation is abused by some local governments. However, the primary cause for these conflicts on land issues is the absence of equal and clearly defined land ownership and a standardized land management system. These defects in land ownership and management system lead to the abusion of land expropriation by local authorities. Although most of us are familiar with the the CCP land policy at different stages, the specific institutional change of "the land ownership-right of use" is always being ignored, such as the progression from "private own/private use" to "private own/collective use" to "joint ownership/collective use", and then, to "abstract public own/collective use". Neither is the development of "nationalization" of the city land in China.In the first part, the important institutional change in the filed of land property, from1921in which the first version of "the Declaration of Chinese Community Party" was published to date, will be reviewed from the perspective of " Right-Duty" and "Ideology-Social Reality". The cause of the institutional change of land system will also be discussed in this part.The frequent institutional change is not the only element should be responsible for the chaotic land property of China, the current constitution and land laws contribute to the conflict and vague of the land system, too. Starting from the Article10of1982constitution, the second part reviews the systems of "national land" and "collective land" within current legal system, and in turn, uncovers the possible causes of the tension between "national land" and "collective land". As the research conclusions show, the definition of "national land" and "collective land" in the current constitution and land law is not clear. As a result, we cannot get the right answers from land law to the question what is "the peasant economic collective", what is "the land own by peasant collective", what is "the city" in the law, what is "nation" in the law, what is "the land own by nation" and "who has the right to be the represent of nation to own the national land and enjoy the benefit of the development of national land", etc. We will discuss the misunderstanding between "nationalization of land" and "urbanization of land" which established by current constitution and land management law in this part.The question "why the land right of citizen was always violated" and "why the urbanization in China cannot escape from a bad deformity way" will be answered in this part, too.The problems of land management are also very important and cannot be ignored for the conflicts and intension within the land system. In1998, China established a system namely "the most restrict land management institution in the world" to protect the agriculture land, capitalization of national land and urbanization. However, the gap between the ideal and the reality is difficult to fill. Legislator cannot find the balance point, thus (1) we are losing the agriculture land continuously;(2) the governments (in particular local governments) make huge money from capitalization of national public land while the land and house price become improper high;(3) the disordered urban sprawl cannot be controlled yet. Some people believe that failure of the land management system is ascribed to the unreasonable "central-local" tax system formed in1994. It is just half truth. The imperfection of land management system itself should also be blamed for the bad situation of the land system. The institutional change of land management system and its defects will be discussed specifically in the third part.How to find a better way to get out the complex land maze? The point of this research is that we need to draw a "reform map" for the land property and land management of China under the framework of "Right-Duty" with the guidance of constitutionalism. This roadmap needs to follow several principles when it is drawn:(1) it should follow the theory of the Socialist Market Economy;(2) it should start with the reform of land property institution which should guarantee the equity of "national land" and "collective land";(3) a unified land market within which people have the right to access both "national land" and "collective land" equally has to establish;(4) perfection of land planning institution and Use Regulation institution is the forth step;(5) to establish a strict system for supervising and regulating the exploration power of government is the fifth step;(6) last but not the least, public participation should be become an important part for all fields of land management system.To practice this reform map, it is necessary to establish a specific path of institutional change which allows the local authorities to enact some unconstitutional legislation. Importantly the range of unconstitutional legislation must be strictly limited and should to follow the ideal of library democracy of course. From the perspective of The "Central-Local" Government Relationship, by reviewing the theory "Benign Unconstitutionality" and analyzing the model of "Notwithstanding Clause" which rise from Canada, the last part will find a new path which named "Constitutional Dialogue", to reconstruct the relationship of institutional change and legal order (especially constitutional order) in China. The framework of "Constitutional Dialogue" will provide a new perspective to relieve the tension between the institutional change in the land filed and legal order.更多还原