In the house sale case in Painter Village, the painter lost the case. The farmers won the lawsuit, but the irony is that the farmers won the lawsuit not because they were infringed upon, nor because their rights and interests were harmed, but because farmers did not have the right to dispose of their own property, and rural economic organizations did not have the right to dispose of collectively owned land. The Songzhuang painter lost the case, which revealed the lack of legal protection of farmers' property rights.
Case background
On December 17, the Beijing Second Intermediate People’s Court made a judgment on the case of painter Li’s appeal against Ma’s house sales contract dispute. This case has attracted media attention The final judgment of the Songzhuang “Painter Village” rural house sales dispute case still found that “the sales contract is invalid.”
Xiaobao Village, Songzhuang Town, Tongzhou District, Beijing, was named Painter’s Village because many painters lived around it. Ma was originally a farmer from Xindian Village, Songzhuang Town. Li is an urban resident, and his registered place of residence is Handan City, Hebei Province. On July 1, 2002, Ma and Li signed a "House Purchase and Sale Agreement" and sold the disputed house and courtyard to Li for 45,000 yuan. In February 2006, Ma and his wife requested confirmation that the purchase contract was invalid.
The Tongzhou Court held after trial that Li was a resident and was not legally allowed to buy or sell the houses of members of rural collective economic organizations. Therefore, the judgment is: 1. Li will vacate three rooms in the north, six rooms in the west wing and the courtyard located in Xindian Village, Tongzhou District, Beijing to Ma within 90 days from the date of this judgment; 2. Ma Haitao pays compensation to Li Yulan The amount of 93,808 yuan shall be settled within 15 days from the date of entry into force of this judgment. After the verdict, Li appealed.
The Second Intermediate People's Court held that the right to use homestead land is a right enjoyed by members of rural collective economic organizations and is linked to the specific identity of the owner. Non-members of the collective economic organization have no right to obtain it or obtain it in disguised form. The subject matter of the "House Purchase and Sale Agreement" signed by Ma and Li is not only the house, but also the corresponding right to use the homestead. Li is not a villager in Xindian Village, Songzhuang Town, Tongzhou District, and the "Land Use Certificate for Collective Land Construction" of the court in dispute has not been legally changed and registered in Li's name by the original land registration authority. Therefore, the court of first instance was correct in determining the validity of the contract based on my country's current land management laws, regulations, and policies.
News Focus
As soon as the verdict came out, it attracted widespread attention from the national media and touched the hearts of tens of millions of urban and rural people. Some people believe that farmers lack integrity and "win the lawsuit but lose integrity." There are also many people who are worried about the future of Songzhuang, "What will happen to Songzhuang once the painter leaves?". Even the judge who judged the case seemed to be sympathetic and added an explanatory paragraph to the judgment, telling the painter who lost the case that he could sue for compensation for losses.
In fact, behind the complicated appearance, a serious problem has begun to appear before us: how to protect farmers' property ownership.
The irony is that the farmers won the lawsuit, not because they were infringed upon, nor because they were defrauded, but because farmers did not have the right to dispose of their own property, and rural economic organizations did not have the right to dispose of collectively owned land.
Today's emphasis on harmonious society should break the dual structure of urban and rural areas and develop in the direction of coordinated urban and rural development. Achieving urban-rural coordination requires not only urbanization, but also allowing migrant workers to move into cities. City residents should also be allowed to "go to the mountains and go to the countryside." Only in this way can the gap between urban and rural areas be truly narrowed.
To solve the problems of rural areas and farmers, it is not just about blood transfusion in rural areas, but more importantly, it is about farmers strengthening the collective strength of rural areas through resource coordination and resource exchange. Restricting farmers' use and disposal of the highest quality and most valuable resource land in rural areas is an infringement of the fundamental interests of farmers.
The "Property Rights Law" has come into effect, and the Property Rights Law clearly stipulates that property rights are equally protected by law. The Constitution, Property Law, and Land Management Law all clearly declare that rural land is collectively owned by farmers, but farmers are still far from being able to truly exercise land ownership, including the right to dispose of land.