Second, the technical specifications for house demolition assessment formulated by the local people's government and its work departments are used to determine the specific price of the demolished hou

Second, the technical specifications for house demolition assessment formulated by the local people's government and its work departments are used to determine the specific price of the demolished houses. In this regard, the relevant legal regulations are only principles. Local governments and their relevant departments have certain flexibility in formulating technical evaluation specifications, which results in a large price space and is inconsistent with the actual situation.

Third, the house demolition management measures formulated by local governments are limited in their application time. The level of formulation of urban house demolition management regulations is generally based on administrative regulations promulgated by state orders, local regulations passed and promulgated by provincial people's congress standing committees, and local regulations promulgated by government orders of local people's governments that enjoy legislative power. Local governments that do not enjoy legislative power also publish normative documents to the public. The formulation time is delayed from administrative regulations, local regulations, local regulations, and normative documents. The time for the final normative documents to be formulated is delayed from the time for the promulgation and implementation of administrative regulations, by as much as two years. When the time for formulating normative documents is postponed, it is the time when the normative documents are applicable to the implementation of house demolition, and the relevant provisions of administrative regulations and local regulations will not be implemented. The reason is that the normative documents formulated by local governments have not been abolished and should continue to be implemented. What's more, some local governments have clearly stipulated in the new normative documents that the normative documents for house demolition shall be effective from the date of publication. Construction projects that have issued house demolition announcements before the announcement shall not be If this method applies, the original method will still be implemented. Judging from the above-mentioned legal norms, the sooner they are implemented, the more beneficial it will be for the people being demolished. Because of this, some local governments do not apply the new legal norms on the date of implementation of the legal norms when it comes to house demolition. Apply normative documents that are not beneficial to the demolished persons. Some local governments have formulated new normative documents for demolition, but have placed restrictions on the application of the new normative documents to some demolished persons. Especially for some houses of demolished persons, although the demolition procedures were basically complete, due to various reasons, the houses were not demolished within two or three years. There are three main reasons why demolition cannot be completed. First, the government's macro-control or the demolishers are short of demolition funds; second, the demolition policy is seriously inconsistent with the actual situation, and the demolished people refuse to demolish; third, individual demolished people are asking unrealistically high prices, resulting in the failure to reach a demolition compensation agreement; fourth, the demolition compensation agreement is not reached; The demolition procedures are incomplete.

(2) The demolisher carries out the demolition without obtaining complete demolition procedures on the grounds of developing the local economy and carrying out demolition work beyond the norm, or the purpose of the house after demolition is inconsistent with the relevant approval documents. Therefore, Directly affects the resettlement compensation standards of the demolished people.

(3) The demolisher seriously violated the demolition procedures and carried out the demolition illegally. This mainly manifests itself in the price assessment of the house of the demolished person, without notifying the demolished person to be present, but by an appraisal agency unilaterally designated by the demolished person to conduct the evaluation, or only signing a contract with one of the owners of the property Demolition compensation agreement, these behaviors are not recognized by the demolished persons.

(4) There is a serious lack of openness and fairness in the demolition and resettlement compensation agreement signed between the demolishers and the demolished persons. This is mainly manifested in the fact that the demolishers operate in secret when signing the resettlement compensation agreement with the demolished persons. For the same houses of the demolished persons, under the same conditions, the resettlement compensation results obtained are different, and some are quite different. As a result, those who have reached an agreement regret it and refuse to demolish it. Some compensations differ even further from the administrative rulings issued by the housing demolition authorities. This makes it more difficult for the people's courts to hear and enforce such cases.

(5) When accepting applications from demolishers for adjudication, some housing demolition authorities know clearly that the demolishers have committed illegal demolitions, but still make compulsory demolitions on the grounds of safeguarding key urban construction projects determined by the government. ruling.

(6) Some demolished persons do not seek truth from facts and ask for high prices on resettlement and compensation issues, hoping to take advantage of the demolition to achieve the purpose of getting rich. After the housing demolition authority made a ruling, the demolished persons filed a lawsuit Administrative litigation. In administrative litigation, the defendant or the right holder of a specific administrative act applies to the people's court for execution in accordance with the law. At this time, the demolished people are unreasonable and resist the execution with violence. Some demolished people even commit suicide or self-mutilation. Blackmail in order to achieve the purpose of asking for high prices that are inconsistent with reality.

Based on the difficult issues listed above in the trial of administrative cases of house demolition and resettlement compensation and land acquisition and resettlement compensation, most of the reasons are caused by the local government’s house demolition authorities and the house demolishers. The reasons for these difficult problems can generally be summarized as follows.

First, in recent years, the economic construction pace of most local governments has been too fast, some of which are seriously inconsistent with reality and exceeded the local economic capacity. Especially in urban economic construction and the establishment of economic development zones, the performance is more outstanding. First, there are two aspects in urban construction. First, some local governments unrealistically expand the development of commercial and residential buildings for the sake of political performance. Secondly, in order to attract investment, it is also impractical to requisition rural collective land. In some cases, when there is no investment project, the requisitioned land is first circled and waited for investment, and some wait for several years. The fundamental reason for this is that the guiding ideology of some local governments to speed up urban economic construction is not in line with the local objective reality and does not carry out construction according to economic laws. Instead, they use unconventional thinking and carry out disorderly economic work.

Secondly, some local governments have ideas that are not in line with objective reality in their guiding ideology of accelerating urban economic construction. This inconsistency is mainly reflected in two points. First, the squares and roads built are not in line with objective reality. It is seriously oversized and wide. The scale of the government administrative center is too high and the standards are too high. Second, there are too many commercial and residential buildings developed and constructed, and the grades are too high. The existence of these problems will inevitably lead to a shortage of funds for house demolition and land acquisition. Due to the shortage of funds, when the government formulates normative documents for house demolition and land acquisition and resettlement compensation, the gap between the resettlement compensation and the actual market situation is large. Some land acquisition and resettlement compensation cannot be received in time, and the demolished people cannot get it. Due resettlement compensation has resulted in some farmers being left without a house or farm for a long period of time. There are also a few local governments that have illegally acquired land and demolished their homes, resulting in the emergence of individual new poor households. Some local government leaders still disagree with this, thinking that this is an action implemented for future economic development and improving the living standards of local people. The difficulties of a small number of demolished people are temporary, and they must overcome the difficulties and obey the overall situation of economic development. .

Thirdly, when some local government housing demolition authorities make administrative rulings on house demolition disputes, they do not base their judgment on relevant legal norms and objective facts, but on the basis of clear infringement rules established by local governments. normative documents to adjudicate people’s legitimate rights and interests. There are also cases where the decision was made illegally on the grounds that the demolishers were clearly aware that the demolishers had committed illegal demolitions, on the grounds of obeying and supporting the government's key projects.

Fourth, the difficult issues encountered by the People’s Court in hearing cases of urban house demolition and rural collective land requisition are as follows: First, when examining whether the specific administrative act being sued is legal, it is pointed out that When the defendant's ruling clearly infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of the demolished persons, the defendant claims that the normative document it is based on was adopted by the local people's congress or government and announced to the public. If the court does not agree with the normative document, it will directly affect the city's Resettlement compensation for urban house demolition and expropriation of rural collective land also affects urban economic construction. In this regard, the People's Court is in a dilemma. The first difficulty is that if the People's Court decides to revoke the administrative decision made by the defendant on the basis that the normative documents based on it are not legally valid, there is a legal basis for the decision to be based on the case itself. Also correct. But such a ruling by the People's Court will be said to not serve and support local economic construction. Second, if the People's Court upholds the ruling, the legitimate rights and interests of the demolished persons will not be protected as they should be.

When the People's Court encounters this dilemma, the current management system of the People's Court is to independently exercise judicial power under the leadership of the local party committee. At the same time, serving local economic construction and maintaining social stability are also the tasks of the People's Court. Therefore, the only way to hear such cases is not to uphold or revoke the judgment in a timely manner, but to do a lot of coordination work to prompt the demolisher and the demolished to reach a demolition and resettlement compensation agreement, and then the plaintiff withdraws the lawsuit.

2. Methods to solve difficult problems in the trial of house demolition administrative cases

In the national urban house demolition and rural collective land requisition resettlement compensation work, some local governments do not administer in accordance with the law. Illegal demolition by some departments has led to collective petitions by the demolished people, violent obstruction of demolition, and even caused serious instability such as casualties, which has attracted the attention of the highest level of the country. To this end, the State Council also held a special executive meeting to study issues related to controlling the scale of urban house demolition and strict demolition management. The general requirements of the meeting are: correct the guiding ideology of demolition work, resolutely correct the behavior of eager for quick success and large-scale demolition and construction in urban construction and house demolition, strictly implement demolition procedures during demolition, and standardize demolition behavior. Demolition compensation meets market-oriented requirements, and demolition and resettlement compensation funds should be paid in full and in a timely manner. In response, relevant departments such as the Ministry of Construction and the Ministry of Land and Resources also took immediate action to carry out their work effectively. If some local governments illegally demolished or expropriated land, their relevant local government officials have been severely investigated and punished. Nationally speaking, it has played a positive role in promoting local government administration and demolition in accordance with the law. This has undoubtedly created an unprecedented good external environment for the People's Court to hear housing demolition and land acquisition cases. But at the same time, we must also realize that although there is an unprecedentedly good external environment, we cannot fundamentally solve difficult problems in one step. To this end, the author believes that the following methods should be adopted to solve problems that arise in the trial of administrative cases of house demolition and land acquisition.

First, based on the existing good external law enforcement environment, proactively maintain contact and communication with local governments, and provide targeted judicial suggestions so that the normative documents they develop must ensure that the government complies with the law. Administration to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the demolished persons from being infringed.

Second, do not participate in the demolition work leading group organized by the local government. If you encounter such a situation, you must explain to them clearly and rationally that the People's Court is the judicial organ of the country and exercises judicial power independently. Judges cannot "be both athletes and referees", otherwise the People's Court will Loss of credibility and damaging to the impartial image of the People's Court. Only in this way can the people's courts serve as the last line of defense to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the people.

Third, the legality of the house demolition ruling should be strictly examined. If there are illegal rulings, especially rulings that infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of the demolished persons, they should be adjudicated in a timely manner and should never be delayed to allow the adjudicating authority to correct the administrative violations in a timely manner.

Fourth, the enforcement of non-litigation administrative enforcement cases of house demolition and advance enforcement cases in administrative litigation must be in compliance with legal provisions upon review by the people's court and should be enforced in a timely manner. This will effectively support the administrative agencies in lawful administration and the demolishers in lawful demolition, and in this way support and serve the economic construction of local governments, realize a virtuous cycle of urban house demolition and collective land requisition resettlement compensation work, and ultimately achieve the legal effect and political effect of the trial. The organic unity of effect and social effect.