本文選題：海南省 + 海岸帶閑置土地　； 參考：《海南大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：基于對(duì)海岸帶的保護(hù),海南省開展了海岸帶保護(hù)開發(fā)專項(xiàng)檢查行動(dòng),對(duì)海南省的閑置土地進(jìn)行全面地清理處置,取得了較好的成效。但是海南有償收回涉海岸帶閑置土地的行政訴訟案件自2016年開始隨著海岸帶整治活動(dòng)的推進(jìn)也逐漸出現(xiàn)。海南有償收回海岸帶閑置土地的飽受爭(zhēng)議,阻礙了海南海岸帶整治的進(jìn)程。結(jié)合海南有償收回閑置土地行政案件來(lái)看,案件的爭(zhēng)議問(wèn)題在事實(shí)認(rèn)定方面,相關(guān)政府以海南省政府公布的海岸線修測(cè)成果來(lái)作為涉案土地是否處于海岸帶200米控制線范圍內(nèi)作為依據(jù),而行政相對(duì)人堅(jiān)持以當(dāng)前實(shí)際的海岸線作為基準(zhǔn)來(lái)判斷。相關(guān)政府認(rèn)為簽訂的《補(bǔ)充協(xié)議》違反上級(jí)政府的規(guī)定來(lái)變相否定因政府的原因?qū)е峦恋亻e置的,而行政相對(duì)人則認(rèn)為是因?yàn)橄嚓P(guān)政府沒有履行《補(bǔ)充協(xié)議》約定的義務(wù)而造成了土地閑置的客觀情況。在收地程序方面,存在以相關(guān)政府以其土地主管部門作為作出收地決定的主體,但是行政相對(duì)人則堅(jiān)稱作出收地決定的主體應(yīng)當(dāng)為縣級(jí)以上人民政府。相關(guān)政府認(rèn)為在作出收地決定前,已經(jīng)經(jīng)過(guò)了協(xié)商程序,而行政相對(duì)人認(rèn)為,相關(guān)政府并未最終與行政相對(duì)人協(xié)商處置方案。在法律適用方面,政府機(jī)關(guān)在作出收地決定時(shí)都是依據(jù)《閑置土地處置辦法》第十二條的規(guī)定,但行政相對(duì)人認(rèn)為按照該規(guī)定相關(guān)政府無(wú)權(quán)單方面決定收回涉案土地。相關(guān)政府確定的補(bǔ)償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是依據(jù)《關(guān)于進(jìn)一步做好閑置土地處置工作的通知》第三點(diǎn),行政相對(duì)人認(rèn)為該補(bǔ)償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)過(guò)低,不能按照上述規(guī)定的成本價(jià)來(lái)補(bǔ)償。造成事實(shí)認(rèn)定錯(cuò)誤,適用法律不正確,收地程序違法的原因是當(dāng)年測(cè)量技術(shù)有限,修測(cè)成圖精度不夠;上級(jí)政府施壓,下級(jí)政府盲目服從;政府負(fù)責(zé)人法治觀念淡薄,唯行政權(quán)力至上:當(dāng)?shù)孛癖娖毡槲幕仞B(yǎng)不高,法律意識(shí)淡薄。為規(guī)范有償收回海岸帶閑置土地,建議:在海岸帶閑置土地事實(shí)認(rèn)定方面要嚴(yán)格落實(shí)政府信息公開條例,公布新的海岸帶修測(cè)成果,要從嚴(yán)把握因政府原因?qū)е峦恋亻e置的認(rèn)定。在程序方面,要嚴(yán)格落實(shí)有關(guān)有償收回閑置土地的協(xié)商程序,要以市縣政府為主體決定收地,堅(jiān)持收地決定必須經(jīng)聽證程序,要遵守"司法查封不能處置"的規(guī)定。在法律適用方面,建議以《土地管理法》第五十八條作為收地決定的依據(jù),補(bǔ)償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)建議按照市場(chǎng)評(píng)估價(jià)格予以確定,并且,要加強(qiáng)政府與法院的溝通,促進(jìn)裁判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的統(tǒng)一,加強(qiáng)法院對(duì)政府的業(yè)務(wù)培訓(xùn)以促進(jìn)依法行政。同時(shí)也要加強(qiáng)法律基礎(chǔ)教育及宣傳,提升民眾的法律素養(yǎng)。
[Abstract]:Based on the protection of coastal zone, Hainan Province carried out a special inspection of coastal zone protection and development, and carried out a comprehensive clean-up and disposal of unused land in Hainan Province, and achieved good results. However, the case of Hainan's compensation to recover idle land in coastal zone has appeared gradually since 2016 with the development of coastal zone regulation. The repossession of idle land in Hainan coastal zone is controversial, which hinders the process of coastal zone regulation in Hainan. In the light of Hainan's administrative case of compensation for the recovery of idle land, the dispute over the case is in the aspect of factual determination. The relevant government based on the results of the coastline repair survey published by Hainan Provincial Government as the basis of whether the land involved is within the control line of 200 meters in the coastal zone, while the administrative counterpart insists on using the current actual coastline as the benchmark to judge the land involved. The relevant governments believe that the "supplementary agreement" signed in violation of the regulations of the higher level government has been used to covert the denial of idle land caused by the government. The administrative counterpart thinks that because the relevant government has not fulfilled the obligations stipulated in the Supplementary Agreement, the objective situation of idle land is caused. In the procedure of land resumption, the relevant government takes its land authority as the main body to make the land resumption decision, but the administrative counterpart insists that the main body of the land resumption decision should be the people's government at or above the county level. The relevant government thinks that before making the decision of land resumption, it has already gone through the negotiation procedure, while the administrative counterpart thinks that the relevant government has not finally negotiated the disposal plan with the administrative counterpart. In terms of the application of the law, when the government authorities make the decision to resume land, they are all based on the provisions of Article 12 of "measures for disposal of idle land", but the administrative counterpart thinks that the relevant government has no right to unilaterally decide to take back the land involved in the case according to this provision. The compensation standard determined by the relevant government is based on the third point of the notice on further doing the disposal of idle land. The administrative counterpart thinks that the compensation standard is too low and cannot be compensated according to the cost price stipulated above. The reasons for the error in the determination of facts, the incorrect application of the law, and the illegal procedures for land resumption are that the surveying techniques were limited and the accuracy of surveying and mapping was not enough; the higher governments put pressure on them, and the lower governments blindly obeyed; and the government responsible persons in charge of the rule of law had a weak sense of law. Only administrative power is supreme: local people's general cultural literacy is not high, legal consciousness is weak. In order to standardize the recovery of idle land in the coastal zone for compensation, it is suggested that the regulations on disclosure of government information should be strictly implemented in the determination of the facts of idle land in the coastal zone, and the results of the new coastal zone repair and survey should be published. Must grasp strictly because of the government reason causes the land idle confirmation. In terms of procedure, it is necessary to strictly implement the consultation procedure concerning the recovery of idle land for compensation, to take the municipal and county governments as the main body to decide on land resumption, to insist that the decision to resume land must go through the hearing procedure, and to abide by the stipulation that "judicial seizure cannot be disposed of." With regard to the application of the law, it is suggested that Article 58 of the Land Administration Law be used as the basis for the decision on land resumption, and that the compensation criteria be determined in accordance with the market assessment price, and that the communication between the government and the court be strengthened to promote the unification of the adjudication standards. Strengthen the professional training of the government by the courts to promote the administration of the law. At the same time, we should strengthen the basic law education and publicity, improve the legal literacy of the public.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：海南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 孫瑞灼;;還有多少閑置土地未被收回?[J];人民政壇;2006年11期

2 尚前名;;閑置土地曝光后要有下文[J];w，

本文編號(hào)：1887089