浅析我国的房屋拆迁法律制度

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

作者:

徐雨雯

导师:

唐烈英

导师单位:

经济法学院(生态法学院)

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

房屋拆迁;拆迁纠纷;公民财产权

摘要:

房屋拆迁是为了满足城市经济发展和基础设施建设的需要,是社会文 明发展的结果。任何国家、任何制度都无法回避这一社会现象,立法应当 对此有所回应。自上世纪八十年代中后期我国进入轰轰烈烈的城市规模建 设以来,尖锐的拆迁矛盾及屡屡发生的流血事件,不但引起了中央的高度 重视,也引起了民众对征地、拆迁的普遍关注。法律制度的一个重要功能 在于规范、引导人们的行为,而我国现行的房屋拆迁法律制度中对公民私 有财产权利的漠视、公共利益滥用、政府角色混乱、补偿不公平、拆迁程 序严重缺位等制度缺陷是引发拆迁领域种种矛盾冲突的根本原因。相关法 规、部门规章、地方性法规的冲突及滞后造成了各地拆迁行为的混乱,拆 迁当事人的利益无法得以保障。笔者对我国目前拆迁法律制度进行了分析, 并撰文以阐述个人之见。 本文研究对象说明:1、本文仅涉及个人享有所有权的房屋,其特有的 名称是“私房”。国家和其他集体组织享有所有权的房屋,其特有的名称是 “公房”,因目前我国对公房依然采取计划经济时期确立的福利政策,公房 在城市房屋拆迁中所面临的法律问题与私房有着比较大的差异,因此,本 文不将公房作为研究对象。2、城市规模的急剧扩张和城镇化建设的加快, 使得原本集中于城市中的房屋拆迁问题逐步向市郊、工业区周边、风景区 及道路周边的农村扩展。笔者认为,城镇居民与农村居民具有同等的法律 地位,其房屋所有权系同等的财产权利,应纳入房屋拆迁的统一立法中, 统一进行规范,而不该分别立法。因此,本文将城镇国有土地上的“私房” 拆迁和农村集体土地上的“私房”拆迁一并作为研究对象,进行分析。 伴随着我国各地轰轰烈烈上演的土地征用、房屋拆迁,漠视公民权利、 违法裁决、违法拆迁、侵犯公民财产权的案件时有发生,拆迁矛盾不断激 化。南京市邓府巷翁彪自焚身亡、北京天安门金水桥前安徽农民朱正亮自 焚未遂等事件还未从人们的脑海中淡去,湖南嘉禾事件、甘肃清水事件、 广东从化事件又刺痛了人们的神经。房屋拆迁关系着大众的根本利益,这 些频发的恶性事件不仅造成了严重的后果,也影响了社会的安定,引起了 民众对拆迁冲突的高度关注。我国有关城市房屋拆迁的立法已纷纷作出修 改,但因缺乏统一的指导,各地立法理念存在差异,尚不能从根本上解决 拆迁矛盾。 有学者认为:树立正确的公民财产权理念是正确解决城市建设与房屋 所有权保护之间利益冲突的重要基础。明确界定社会公共利益且将其作为 私房拆迁的直接目的;遵守债权相对性的基本规则;规范政府在拆迁活动 中的行为、体现行政管理活动应当为平衡拆迁人与被拆迁人利益及社会利 益之间的关系提供服务;保护被拆迁人对建设项目立项的知情权和非社会 公益拆迁的异议权;对被拆迁人进行合理补偿等必要的立法内容是当前城 市建设活动规范进行的必要保障。 本文针对以上思考,从五个部分对我国房屋拆迁制度进行阐述: 第一,从我国房屋拆迁立法沿革追溯,分析了我国的拆迁立法背景及 起源、1991年《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》的出台及缺陷、2001年修订《城 市房屋拆迁管理条例》的进步意义、2003年9月19日国务院办公厅向各省、 自治区、直辖市人民政府、国务院各部委、各直属机构发出国办发明电 (2003)42号、2004年6月6日国务院办公厅向各省、自治区、直辖市人 民政府、国务院各部委、各直属机构发出国办发(2004)46号两个文件的 出台及其对房屋拆迁立法进程的重要意义,表明我国房屋拆迁法律制度新 的指导思想已经确立。同时,对我国现行的房屋拆迁法律体系构架进行了 解剖,指出虽然我国的宪法、法律、行政法规、规章、地方性法规、司法 解释等法律规范对拆迁法律制度均有涉及,但还没有一部专门的拆迁法律 规范。现行的《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》存在违宪、违反上位法、对拆迁 行为性质定义不清等重大缺陷。拆迁法律制度的混乱是造成拆迁领域矛盾 重重的根本原因。 第二,分析了我国房屋拆迁现状,指出集体所有土地上的房屋拆迁存 在着缺乏统一规范、没有产权登记制度、“公共利益”无明确界定、补偿安 置没有标准、农民对拆迁没有发言权等重大制度缺陷;同时,还指出了国 有土地上房屋拆迁活动中野蛮拆迁、政府介入、“公共利益”滥用、司法公 正缺失、市场监管不力、法制建设滞后、主管部门作风不实等具体矛盾。 第三,对我国现行拆迁立法缺陷进行剖析,从拆迁行为性质、政府角 色、公共利益界定、公益拆迁与商业拆迁、不同性质土地上房屋拆迁的补 偿标准及程序等五个方面阐述了我国现行房屋拆迁制度的缺陷;进一步阐 明了在拆迁立法中,确立上述制度对解决拆迁矛盾、平衡拆迁各方当事人 利益、维护政府形象、促进社会稳定的积极意义。 第四,对比国外拆迁立法中遵守的三大普遍原则,即:公共利益原则、 正当程序原则和充分补偿原则;指出我国拆迁立法存在着“公共利益”界 定不明确、拆迁程序形同虚设、补偿没有标准等法律缺陷。三大普遍原则 的缺位,尤其是重要保底条款“充分补偿”的缺位,使得我国拆迁法律制 度中对拆迁当事人,尤其是对被拆迁人的利益保护极为不利。 最后,对如何完善我国房屋拆迁法律制度提出了一系列的思考和建议, 主要包括建立公民财产权保护理念;确立公共利益、公正程序和公平补偿 三大原则;明确政府地位及职能;区分公益拆迁和商业拆迁;完善拆迁程 序;平衡拆迁人和被拆迁人的权利、义务对等关系;取消行政裁决程序; 建立调整拆迁管理、征收和有偿转让三方面规范为基础的房屋拆迁法律制 度等内容,以期共同探讨。

学科:

民商法学

提交日期

2026-01-22

引用参考

徐雨雯. 浅析我国的房屋拆迁法律制度[D]. 西南政法大学,2006.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 浅析我国的房屋拆迁法律制度
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 2025tj516
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 徐雨雯
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 民商法学院(知识产权学院)
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法学硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2006
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 唐烈英
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 经济法学院(生态法学院)
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 房屋拆迁;拆迁纠纷;公民财产权
  • dc.subject
  • house demolishment;demolishment dissension;citizen's property right
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 房屋拆迁是为了满足城市经济发展和基础设施建设的需要,是社会文 明发展的结果。任何国家、任何制度都无法回避这一社会现象,立法应当 对此有所回应。自上世纪八十年代中后期我国进入轰轰烈烈的城市规模建 设以来,尖锐的拆迁矛盾及屡屡发生的流血事件,不但引起了中央的高度 重视,也引起了民众对征地、拆迁的普遍关注。法律制度的一个重要功能 在于规范、引导人们的行为,而我国现行的房屋拆迁法律制度中对公民私 有财产权利的漠视、公共利益滥用、政府角色混乱、补偿不公平、拆迁程 序严重缺位等制度缺陷是引发拆迁领域种种矛盾冲突的根本原因。相关法 规、部门规章、地方性法规的冲突及滞后造成了各地拆迁行为的混乱,拆 迁当事人的利益无法得以保障。笔者对我国目前拆迁法律制度进行了分析, 并撰文以阐述个人之见。 本文研究对象说明:1、本文仅涉及个人享有所有权的房屋,其特有的 名称是“私房”。国家和其他集体组织享有所有权的房屋,其特有的名称是 “公房”,因目前我国对公房依然采取计划经济时期确立的福利政策,公房 在城市房屋拆迁中所面临的法律问题与私房有着比较大的差异,因此,本 文不将公房作为研究对象。2、城市规模的急剧扩张和城镇化建设的加快, 使得原本集中于城市中的房屋拆迁问题逐步向市郊、工业区周边、风景区 及道路周边的农村扩展。笔者认为,城镇居民与农村居民具有同等的法律 地位,其房屋所有权系同等的财产权利,应纳入房屋拆迁的统一立法中, 统一进行规范,而不该分别立法。因此,本文将城镇国有土地上的“私房” 拆迁和农村集体土地上的“私房”拆迁一并作为研究对象,进行分析。 伴随着我国各地轰轰烈烈上演的土地征用、房屋拆迁,漠视公民权利、 违法裁决、违法拆迁、侵犯公民财产权的案件时有发生,拆迁矛盾不断激 化。南京市邓府巷翁彪自焚身亡、北京天安门金水桥前安徽农民朱正亮自 焚未遂等事件还未从人们的脑海中淡去,湖南嘉禾事件、甘肃清水事件、 广东从化事件又刺痛了人们的神经。房屋拆迁关系着大众的根本利益,这 些频发的恶性事件不仅造成了严重的后果,也影响了社会的安定,引起了 民众对拆迁冲突的高度关注。我国有关城市房屋拆迁的立法已纷纷作出修 改,但因缺乏统一的指导,各地立法理念存在差异,尚不能从根本上解决 拆迁矛盾。 有学者认为:树立正确的公民财产权理念是正确解决城市建设与房屋 所有权保护之间利益冲突的重要基础。明确界定社会公共利益且将其作为 私房拆迁的直接目的;遵守债权相对性的基本规则;规范政府在拆迁活动 中的行为、体现行政管理活动应当为平衡拆迁人与被拆迁人利益及社会利 益之间的关系提供服务;保护被拆迁人对建设项目立项的知情权和非社会 公益拆迁的异议权;对被拆迁人进行合理补偿等必要的立法内容是当前城 市建设活动规范进行的必要保障。 本文针对以上思考,从五个部分对我国房屋拆迁制度进行阐述: 第一,从我国房屋拆迁立法沿革追溯,分析了我国的拆迁立法背景及 起源、1991年《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》的出台及缺陷、2001年修订《城 市房屋拆迁管理条例》的进步意义、2003年9月19日国务院办公厅向各省、 自治区、直辖市人民政府、国务院各部委、各直属机构发出国办发明电 (2003)42号、2004年6月6日国务院办公厅向各省、自治区、直辖市人 民政府、国务院各部委、各直属机构发出国办发(2004)46号两个文件的 出台及其对房屋拆迁立法进程的重要意义,表明我国房屋拆迁法律制度新 的指导思想已经确立。同时,对我国现行的房屋拆迁法律体系构架进行了 解剖,指出虽然我国的宪法、法律、行政法规、规章、地方性法规、司法 解释等法律规范对拆迁法律制度均有涉及,但还没有一部专门的拆迁法律 规范。现行的《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》存在违宪、违反上位法、对拆迁 行为性质定义不清等重大缺陷。拆迁法律制度的混乱是造成拆迁领域矛盾 重重的根本原因。 第二,分析了我国房屋拆迁现状,指出集体所有土地上的房屋拆迁存 在着缺乏统一规范、没有产权登记制度、“公共利益”无明确界定、补偿安 置没有标准、农民对拆迁没有发言权等重大制度缺陷;同时,还指出了国 有土地上房屋拆迁活动中野蛮拆迁、政府介入、“公共利益”滥用、司法公 正缺失、市场监管不力、法制建设滞后、主管部门作风不实等具体矛盾。 第三,对我国现行拆迁立法缺陷进行剖析,从拆迁行为性质、政府角 色、公共利益界定、公益拆迁与商业拆迁、不同性质土地上房屋拆迁的补 偿标准及程序等五个方面阐述了我国现行房屋拆迁制度的缺陷;进一步阐 明了在拆迁立法中,确立上述制度对解决拆迁矛盾、平衡拆迁各方当事人 利益、维护政府形象、促进社会稳定的积极意义。 第四,对比国外拆迁立法中遵守的三大普遍原则,即:公共利益原则、 正当程序原则和充分补偿原则;指出我国拆迁立法存在着“公共利益”界 定不明确、拆迁程序形同虚设、补偿没有标准等法律缺陷。三大普遍原则 的缺位,尤其是重要保底条款“充分补偿”的缺位,使得我国拆迁法律制 度中对拆迁当事人,尤其是对被拆迁人的利益保护极为不利。 最后,对如何完善我国房屋拆迁法律制度提出了一系列的思考和建议, 主要包括建立公民财产权保护理念;确立公共利益、公正程序和公平补偿 三大原则;明确政府地位及职能;区分公益拆迁和商业拆迁;完善拆迁程 序;平衡拆迁人和被拆迁人的权利、义务对等关系;取消行政裁决程序; 建立调整拆迁管理、征收和有偿转让三方面规范为基础的房屋拆迁法律制 度等内容,以期共同探讨。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • House demolition is to fill the demand of the urban economy development and fundamental construction and it is the outcome of the social culture progress, which could not be eschewed by any country or any institution, therefore the legislation should respond to such social phenomena accordingly. Since the mid-late of 1980' s, China entered the large-scale urban constructing period, but the acute conflicts of the demolition and the frequent bloodshed events have caught the high attention from the central government to the common people on the land requisition and house demolition. One important function of the law system is to guide people's behavior but the defect of China's current house demolition law system including the unawares of the citizen's private property right, the abuse of the public interest, the multi-roles of the government, the unfairness of the compensation, the absence of the demolition procedure, is the root cause of the multitudino us conflicts in the demolition fields. Unfortunately, the lag and the conflict of the relevant regulations, section rules and local regulations cause the fact that the disordered demolition actions becomes fierce and the interest of the parties could not be guaranteed in regions. Instructions to the studied objects: 1. only the house with the private property right or with the special term of"private house" is studied in the essay. The house with the public or collective property right or with the special term of"public house" will not be discussed in the essay because the public house still adopts the welfare policy since the"planned economy" period and the faced legal issues of the demolition is quite different from that for the private house.2. The dramatic expansion of the urban scale and the speed up of the urbanization construction extend the range of the house demolition problems to the rural areas close to the suburb, surrounding of the industrial part, beauty spots and the main traffic bond. Owning to the equal legal status of the urban residents and the rural residents, their house ownerships are the equal property rights and should be included into the common legal framework and should be regulated with the unified benchmark instead of the separate laws. Therefore, the objects of private house demolition on the urban state-owned land and on the rural collective-owned land will be studied and analyzed together in the essay. With the land confiscation and house demolition in multi-regions of China, the law cases of citizen right disregard, illegal arbitrament, illegal dismantlement and citizen's property right impingement occur at times and the conflicts from demolition become more acute. The events of Wengbiao's death from self-burning at Dengfuxian Street Nanjing, Jiangsu Province and the abortive self-burn of Wuzhengliang, the farmer from Anhui Province, at Tian' anmen Square , Beijing are still recalled, the new events related to the house demolition in Jiahe, Hunan province, Qingshui, Gansu Province and Conghua, Guangdong Province occurred again. The house demolition is connected to the basic interests of the common people, therefore the frequent virulent events not only cause the serious aftermath but also affect the social stability and catch close attention of the people on the demolition conflicts. The relevant regulations of the urban house demolition have already been amended accordingly in different regions but still could not resolve the demolition conflicts fundamentally due to the lack of unified guideline and the variance of the legislation concepts. Some scholars hold the opinion that it is the important base to set up the correct principle of citizen' s property right for the interest conflicts settlement between the urban construction and the house ownership right protection. The necessary legislation content, to clarify the social common interests and treat it as the direct purpose for private house demolition, to follow the basic rule of credit right relativity, to regulate the government's behavior in the house demolition activities to reflect that the administrative activities should provide the service to balance the interests between the demolished and demolishing parties and the society, to protect the demolished party's right to know the construction project and the right to object the demolition for non-social public interests, to offer the reasonable compensation to the demolished party and so on, is the guarantee for the current urban construction's normative activities. China's house demolition system will be expatiated on from five parts based on the points above in the essay. First, it is to retrospect China's house demolition legislation history, to analyze the background and the origin of the legislation, the come on and limitation of"Regulations for Management of Urban House Demolition (1991)", the advanced significance of the amendment of the"Regulations for Management of Urban House Demolition"(2001), the come on and the important significance of the two files from the General Office of State Council to provinces, autonomous regions, municipal governments, the ministries and commissions of the State Council, the immediate institutions(Sep 19,2003 and Jun 6, 2004), which indicates the new guidance ideology for China's house demolition legal system has been set up. Meanwhile, China's current house demolition legal system framework is anatomized. It is pointed out that China still lacks a special law criterion in the demolition field, though the demolition legal system has been referred in different law criterions including the Constitution, laws, administrative regulations, rules, local regulations, justice explanations etc. legal criteria. The current"Regulations for Management of Urban House Demolition" has the fatal limitations including the violation of the constitution, the violation of the higher level law, unclear definition of the demolition action property etc. The chaos of the demolition legal system is the root cause of kinds of conflicts in the demolition field Second, the current demolition situation in China is analyzed in the essay and it is pointed out the existence of the fatal system limitations including the lack of unified criterion, the absence of property right registration system, the unclear identification of the"public interests", the absence of the compensation and allocation criterion, farmers' limited voice right etc. for the house demolition on the collective-owned land. Meanwhile, it is also pointed out the actual conflicts of the house demolition on the state-owned land such as the brutal demolition, the involvement of the government, the abuse of the"public interest", the absence of the justice justness, the powerless market supervision, the delay of the legal system construction, the unrealistic style of the administration and so on. Third, the limitation of China's current demolition legislation is parsed. It is to expatiate on the limitation of China's current house demolition system from the aspects of the demolition behaviors' character, the government role, the identification of the public interests, the demolition for commonweal and for business, and the compensation standard for the house demolition on the land with different property. Furthermore, the positive significance is clarified to build up such systems in the house demolition legislation progress to resolve the demolition conflicts, to balance the interests of different parties, to vindicate the government image and to promote the stability of the society. Four, compared with the"three universal principles", i. e. "the public interests", the proper legal procedure and the sufficient compensation, in other countries, it is pointed out in the essay that the identification of the"public interest" is unclear, the existing demolition procedure doesn't work in reality and the compensation standard is not"sufficient" in China. The absence of the three universal principles, especially the absence of the important protection item of"sufficient compensation", brings the serious disadvantages to protect the interests of demolished party under the current demolition legal system. Finally, with the purpose for further learned discussion, a series of thoughts and suggestions are raised in the essay concerning how to improve China's house demolition legal system, which include to build up the citizen's property right concept, to establish the three basic principles as the public interest, just procedure and equitable compensation, to clarify the status and function of the government, to distinguish the demolition for public or business interest, to improve the house demolition procedure, to balance the equal association of right and obligation between the demolished and demolishing parties, to abolish the administrative arbitrament program and to found the three basic legal relationships of the demolition administration adjustment, the transfer with compensation and the expropriation with compensation etc.
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-01-22
回到顶部