“城市的土地属于国家所有”的规范解释
发布时间：2019-06-18 21:50
【摘要】：立法与实践对宪法规定的"城市的土地属于国家所有"的曲解损害了土地权益人利益并严重违背法理。目前学者的种种解释或不能适应市场经济的发展,或存在与历史事实不符的问题。制宪原意是在允许原土地权益人继续使用的情况下将城市土地国有化,这与当时的计划经济体制相适应。然而,经过历次修正案和土地市场的开放,条文意义改变为在土地权益人保留了土地使用权的情况下将城市土地国有化。原土地上的权益人的权益虽经历了从所有、使用到使用权的转变,但并未发生实质改变。该解释可以通过《宪法》第13条公益征收条款之规定反向推出。《土地管理法》和《城市房地产管理法》应当根据新解释予以重新修订。
[Abstract]:Legislation and practice misinterpret the constitutional interpretation of "urban land belongs to the state", which damages the interests of land rights holders and seriously violates the legal principle. At present, scholars' explanations can not adapt to the development of market economy, or there are problems that are inconsistent with historical facts. The original intention of constitution was to nationalize urban land while allowing the original land owners to continue to use, which was in line with the planned economy system at that time. However, after previous amendments and the opening of the land market, the meaning of the provisions has changed to nationalize urban land under the condition that the land rights holder retains the right to use the land. Although the rights and interests of the original land rights and interests have gone through the change from ownership, use to the right to use, but there has been no real change. This interpretation can be reversed through the provisions of Article 13 of the Constitution on public interest collection. The Land Management Law and the Urban Real Estate Management Law should be revised in accordance with the new interpretation.
【作者单位】： 广东外语外贸大学土地法制研究院;
【基金】：“中国博士后科学基金第57批面上资助项目”(项目号2015M570203)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D922.33
本文编号：2501818
[Abstract]:Legislation and practice misinterpret the constitutional interpretation of "urban land belongs to the state", which damages the interests of land rights holders and seriously violates the legal principle. At present, scholars' explanations can not adapt to the development of market economy, or there are problems that are inconsistent with historical facts. The original intention of constitution was to nationalize urban land while allowing the original land owners to continue to use, which was in line with the planned economy system at that time. However, after previous amendments and the opening of the land market, the meaning of the provisions has changed to nationalize urban land under the condition that the land rights holder retains the right to use the land. Although the rights and interests of the original land rights and interests have gone through the change from ownership, use to the right to use, but there has been no real change. This interpretation can be reversed through the provisions of Article 13 of the Constitution on public interest collection. The Land Management Law and the Urban Real Estate Management Law should be revised in accordance with the new interpretation.
【作者单位】： 广东外语外贸大学土地法制研究院;
【基金】：“中国博士后科学基金第57批面上资助项目”(项目号2015M570203)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D922.33
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前3条
1 杨经伦;;论我国的土地制度建设[J];发现;1993年03期
2 何国长;;甘肃农村土地制度改革问题研究[J];社科纵横;2009年07期
3 ;[J];;年期
相关重要报纸文章 前6条
1 李承志;非法囤地“可作为”缘于土地执法“难作为”[N];人民法院报;2007年
2 孙宪忠 中国社会科学院法学研究所;政府经营土地应以当事人角色出现[N];中国社会科学报;2010年
3 徐明 卫龙君;对土地经营权入股的再思考[N];人民法院报;2001年
4 江苏省无锡市惠山区人民法院 边剑扬 张可家;土地承包经营权流转纠纷的涉诉原因及对策建议[N];人民法院报;2012年
5 蔡书芳;立法滞后导致农民征地利益受损[N];中国财经报;2008年
6 ;地政大纛之猎猎[N];中国房地产报;2003年
相关硕士学位论文 前2条
1 郭亮;政府经营土地的法律分析[D];内蒙古大学;2014年
2 马晓姝;法律视野下的失地农民权益保护[D];西南交通大学;2009年
，本文编号：2501818
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/jingjilunwen/fangdichanjingjilunwen/2501818.html
