海龟浮上海面

Li Yulan, a painter living in Beijing, finds herself in a worrying situation. She lives in Songzhuang village, an artists' community located within the borders of Beijing municipality, but outside the city proper. Now, the contract she signed five years ago when purchasing her home has been declared void by the local court. The court order also demands that she leave her home within ninety days.

Li is not alone in her predicament: since October 2006, twelve artists have been taken to court by the farmers from whom they bought their Song village properties. These farmers had been delighted to sell their homes for what at the time were considered excellent prices, but the recent dramatic rise in property values makes them think that they got a raw deal; today, they seek to reclaim their properties.

For the more than 1,500 artists who live in Songzhuang village, this news has come as a bolt from the blue. If the court's judgment is upheld, each one will be facing the same fate as Li Yulan - given no choice but to move out of the village. They had never imagined that their contracts, whose validity was guaranteed by the local government and village head, would not receive the protection of Chinese law. In the event, the root cause of all the trouble is that the houses they bought are governed by what are informally known as "lesser property rights".

The next land revolution? -- Li Datong, OpenDemocracy

Rural citizens in China have long been practising the transfer of the usufruct or "rights of use" of their disposable properties (including but not limiting to land, houses and apartments) for an agreeable period to third parties. Those transfers are based on the fact that a rural citizen, when he/she goes into an agreement with a third party, has the "landuse (and above ground) title" which is designated by the authorities of the rural community where the said rural citizen resides.

The "landuse rights" of rural land is covered by the relevant written rules and regulations stipulated by the central (and local) government. The major one of which is "Land Administration Law" (or Tudi Guanli Fa), passed by the central government. According to the law, the basic administrative unit of the rural communities is village (or Cun). The land within the administrative boundaries of a village is collectively owned by that village (or all its registered households). The boundaries of a village's land have to be registered and submitted to the higher administrative organ for record and arbitration (clearing of disputes among villages on landuse titles), before a "certificate of landuse rights" is assigned. The land, which was divided among and assigned to its registered households, under the guidance of the village committee whose figure head supposedly was democratically elected by the village members, will then have a legitimate title.

One must not confuse the terms, "ownership of land" and "landuse rights". Bearing in mind that the ultimate ownership of all land in China, rural and urban, belongs to the State, which is a collective term like village, and should not be mixed with either the central or local government, as they are only functional organs. All individuals and organizations therefore only have the rights of use of their land title, when they are engaged into any land (or property above ground of certain land) transfer arrangement. The only different between rural and urban land is that rural land can be "collectively" used without a time limit, yet still not "freehold" by the corresponding collective owner; and urban land are all "leasehold" for a certain time period, based on such landuse purposes as industrial, commercial and residential etc.

The case of Songzhuang village seems to be a case of contract-breaching, caused by the "landuse rights" transferor. It is a case not only governed by the "Land Administration Law", but also relevant contract law and regulation. If the transferor's "landuse title" is being registered, via his/her village authority, the contract of transferral of usage of the subject land title will then be legal. Hence, the basic rights of the transferee on that contract will be legally protected. Court judgement will largely depend on how the contract is being formulated and exercised. The key would be the leasing period of that said property. I anticipate that the transferee has an upper hand.

I personally don't see this as a turning point of a "next land revolution", because of some greedy peasants who don't honour LEGAL contracts. If one defines revolution as a bottom-up social movement, with regards to the issue of land administration, I see more the possibility of a top-down incremental reform in an economy which is ruled by an authoritarian regime who is eager to merge with the international communities.


Further Reading:

1. Li Datong: The next land revolution?
   The outcome of the key contest over rural property rights will transform China yet again, says Li Datong.
   
2. CCTV经济信息联播: 律师:艺术村小产权房不受法律保护
   
3. 南方周末: 北京宋庄画家村房产之争 房价涨农民心急要房
   
4. 新京报: 陷小产权纠纷 315名宋庄艺术家联名呼吁“维权”
   
5. 宋庄：转型中国的典型个案(《财经时报》2005年10月15日)

(Comment crosspost at OpenDemocracy.net)

In a mass production factory, protested by their customers, the quality contoller is being punished by the administration for not letting the ill-quality products pass.

The ill-quality product has been guaranteed of its buyer, who considers only of the 'produce-of-the-factory' label but not its quality; or the buyers are actually paying to process their own product in return for a label.

Should we not see their petition as some kind of 'consumer rights protection'?

To put it to the court of arbitration, I solemnly suggest:

(a) the factor's board of directors who failed its quality controller, being guilty of not disclosing its 'unwritten rules', shall withdraw its 'punishment' on the QC and beg for a pardon;

(b) all petitioners shall either take or leave their product, as they have to honor their previous contract;

(c) the products in question, being idle in this case, have no say what so ever;

(d) considering there may have buyers who care also of their product's quality, to resolve this dilemma situation, at least two types of contract will have to be available in the future, before both parties enter into a processing agreement.

This argumentative case happened in China.


Further Reading:

1. Harmony means everyone gets a passing grade (Danwei.org)

You are not real, when you have made yourself publicly known on the Internet, a virtual reality as many have put it, in one form or another.

Your identity is an integrated sum of many of the elements you have decisively planned, like the ingredients put together by a chef on his recipe.

You are the ONE, an unique being like no others. You are the creation of yourself. You are your own Father. You are your God. And, God is YOU.

You will grow, bigger and bigger, in time. The size of it is directly proportionate to the number of eyeballs and attention you have caught in the public realm. The limit of which is the sky.

You can be the ONE that no one could neglect, no matter they like you or not, especially when you are being put under the microscope by the traditional and unconventional media.

The public and/or the media will take control of your destiny. They nurture you and become the Mother, an incubator or a milch cow.

You shall, in time, turn into an Unidentified Fake Object. You are a bird, a plane, the Superman or an UFO. You will soon be lost in the virtual space. A lost garbage in the sky that the law of gravity has no power upon you.

You think you are YOU. But YOU are not you. YOU are just a simulacrum of yourself.

Further Reading:

1. Jean Baudrillard on the New Technologies
   
2. Wikiscandal
   
3. My So-Called Second Life
   
4. Making Mischief on the Web
   
5. Beware the Online Collective

Joel Martinsen at Danwei.org has briefed a recent Chinese media response to the alleged "Anti-China" sentiment of the West that was printed by the official Glabal People magazine. The magazine summarizes those western "attacks" as stemming from absurd theories like "China Threat", "China Collapse", "China Split" and "Yellow Peril".

There is an old Chinese saying says, "If you did a bad thing to other, other will do the same to you".

If I were not mistaken. Was there once an anti-American sentiment raging in China during the whole pre-reform period? U.S. was then considered as the paramount enemy (among other imperialists) of the world (and of China of course).

"Imperialism is the highest stage of Capitalism", according to Lenin. And, it is so corrupted that it is at the verge of collapse. These were printed on the textbooks and widely advertised on the mass media in China.

"Proletariat of the World Get United!" and "Down with the American Imperialism!" were the two most frequently used propaganda slogans found on Chinese mainstream media, if not every day at that time.

China is becoming softer and behaves more like a gentleman now. But to most in the west, the same Communist regime is still running the nation which was extremely agitative sometimes before. And, the worst of all is that this same country is more-and-more becoming a tiger instead of a panda, in terms of both economic and military strength.

The feelings of the west to a "face-lifted" China are certainly complicated, especially to those who know a little bit about the political ideology of Communism. The cause of Communist Party(s) is to turn the whole world "Red", as the rule of Marxism implies.

The Chinese Communist elites might think differently now. Well, I dont know. It is just a wild guess based on what they are preaching inside (and outside) for a harmonious society (and, world).

If the regime really meant what it said, then it is better not to act so childishly like what Global People has done. Time itself will tell.

"An Eye for An Eye" will not help to improve the image of China, and the West too.

Further Reading: (Updated 28 Dec)

1. Danwei.org: Who has it in for China?
   
2. Self-Confident China Sees Its Own Star Rising
   
3. The Sino-U.S. Relation and Its Structural Clash
   
4. Friend, Enemy, or Equal? — A new Cold War with China?
   
5. Explaining the Turnaround in the US-China Relationship

(This article was also posted on Interlocals.net, a crossborder opinion hub focusing on cultural, socio-economic and political issues.)

In an effort to fight corruption at grassroots level in the countryside, a document has been jointly issued by the General Offices of the Central Committee of the CPC and the State Council. It advocates clean governance in rural areas and aims to improve the codes of conduct for party members and officials at grassroots level. China Daily said that everything, except state secrets, must be open to party members and villagers as to promote transparency.

I've gone through the Chinese document and haven't found anywhere mentioning "state secrets". It probably is politically correct to say anything like that in the mainstream media, even it doesn't exist.

However, it's difficult for the general public to interpret what actually do "state secrets" mean, if it's really there on the document. It could be easily manipulated by those at the top to cover up anything they don't want to disclose.

I've come across some information lately, don't know whether they're classified as "state secrets" or not. As they're generally prossessed by the local academia, I hope not.

Latest research figures show that Chinese citizens with wealth (excluding potential assets owned in the overseas) valued over RMB 50 million yuan numbered at 27,310 persons as of end of this March. Among which, 3,220 persons have economic assets over RMB 100 million yuan.

The investigation was done jointly by research departments of the following institutions, namely State Council, Central Party School of CPC, Propaganda Department of CPC and Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Those figures are from their investigation report on China's present socio-economic condition, with detailed information recording the economic income across different social groups.

Most astonishing of all is that among those with economic assets over RMB 100 million yuan, or the wealthiest group, 90% of them are princelings (2,932 persons). Investigations revealed that the assets they're possessing are being verified as either illegal returns via power trade with the help of their family background or income received through disguised buinesses.

In addition, I've also dug out some "state secrets" on the web (in Chinese). Believe it or not.

The fourth report of "On the Investigation Work in Shanghai" indicated that high-level government officials at various levels of Shanghai have opened a total of 1,322 bank accounts using anonymous or fake names, among which 53 (including 9 foreign currency accounts) belong to Chen Lianyu with an aggregated amount of RMB 274.1 million yuan. The total value of the 1,322 (including 355 foreign currency) bank accounts amounts to RMB 9864.3 million yuan, to be exact.

Comrade Lianyu has also 9 private apartments and houses for meeting with his 11 mistresses. 25 passports belong to himself, his family members and his attaches were also discovered, together with 9 open all-year-round Europen or Hongkong and Macau first or business class air tickets.

That's all "state secrets" for now.

(This article was also posted on Interlocals.net, a crossborder opinion hub focusing on cultural, socio-economic and political issues.)

Update:
Zhang Luping, a Beijing-based animal rights activist, said her animal protection website www.ani8.com was shut on Nov 11. Police told her the closure was due to her "leaking state secrets". That afternoon about 500 dog-raisers held a protest near the Beijing Zoo advocating their disagreement with the arbitrary "One-Household-One-Dog" policy. (Dog Day Afternoon)