news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

the forced demolition of an orchard in ye county, henan province has attracted widespread public attention.

the orchard was built by a college student named jia in response to the national call for rural revitalization. he contracted more than 30 acres of land and cultivated it for nearly ten years. however, it was forcibly demolished by more than 400 people organized by the local executive deputy county magistrate.

on september 20, the pingdingshan city joint investigation team issued a notice:

in response to the recent online report of "forced demolition of orchards in ye county" caused by a dispute over compensation standards, the pingdingshan municipal party committee and municipal government immediately established a joint investigation team composed of the commission for discipline inspection and supervision, natural resources and planning, agriculture and rural affairs, forestry, justice and other departments to carry out a comprehensive investigation.

the discipline inspection commission takes the lead and all departments cooperate. this investigation team is quite large. the follow-up investigation will definitely have a result, but there are several core issues that must be clarified.

1. how much should the demolition compensation amount be?

the core of this incident is the demolition of the orchard. because the demolition compensation could not be negotiated, the situation got out of control.

first, the standard compensation document proposed by ye county officials was abolished in 2020 and is not applicable.

secondly, whether the orchard meets the identification standards for economic forests in the "notice on issuing the identification standards for ecological forests and economic forests in the returning farmland to forest project" issued by the state forestry administration.

first determine the nature of the land, and then have a professional organization conduct an assessment. whether it is 180,000 or 3 million, there must be a definite standard.

if you still can't reach an agreement based on the evaluation, then go to court and wait for the judgment, and everything will be done according to the law.

even if you think that 3 million yuan for 7 acres of land is outrageous, this is not a reason for forced demolition.

when 400 people rushed in, their reason became unreasonable, not to mention that it was illegal.

2. other responsibilities

during the forced demolition process, if one party was forcibly dragged, was there any injury? does this behavior violate the public security administration law?

were the fruit trees in the orchard damaged? if so, would that constitute “damaging other people’s property”?

news reports said that the authorities took coercive measures against many people in the orchard and detained them for a whole day. does this involve "illegal detention"?

when the deputy county magistrate led a team of 400 people to carry out forced demolition, did this involve "abuse of power"?

if it is confirmed that the government has no right to expropriate land, does it involve "illegal expropriation of land"?

i have listed all of this just to express one point. now that the investigation team has been established, i hope there will be a convincing result and that illegal acts will be severely punished.

3. secondary public opinion caused by the incident

1. after the deputy county magistrate led a team to demolish an orchard, which attracted attention, his work history on the government's official website changed, and the time he started working was suspected to have been changed from 15 to 17 years old.

it is not clear when and why this resume was revised.

however, the age and work experience of leading cadres are not trivial matters and cannot be taken lightly. if they involve fraud, it is even more serious and should be dealt with in accordance with party and government discipline.

2. facing public pressure, the county party secretary said in an interview: “there is no forced demolition.”

this statement has triggered more questions. if it was not a forced demolition, why were more than 400 people, including the public security department, mobilized? could it be that the video of people being carried away with their limbs spread out was edited maliciously?

moreover, when the deputy county magistrate was interviewed by the media, he admitted to the forced demolition of liyuan and said, "i don't care who it is, we are working on the implementation of key projects and i am willing to take responsibility."

this self-contradictory statement undoubtedly increased the public pressure on the incident.

finally, should these 7 acres of land be counted as arable land with scattered crops or as economic forest? in the process of how to characterize the land, there are contradictions in the documents between superiors and subordinates, which leads to disagreements. i think this is normal.

the problem is that jia has already filed a lawsuit, but the house was forcibly demolished before the court made a ruling. this is the crux of the matter.

now that things have come to this, we can only wait for the conclusion of the investigation team.

as i said, power must be constrained and the rule of law must not be shaken.

power is a double-edged sword, and the key to its use lies in whether it is subject to effective constraints and supervision.

in a society ruled by law, no individual or organization can be above the law and do whatever they want.