Many ideas have been suggested during NA sessions because quite simply a better mechanism is needed to prevent shortcomings in land management and use and a need to reduce land-related complaints.

Many people are concerned that there is still a long way to go to bring justice to land owners as the draft law still has many gaps and loopholes.

Besides, policy-makers are not able to solve these shortcomings and the amended law is not much different from the current law.

Over the past ten years of the implementation of the 2003 Land Law, land disputes remain a hotspot as many problems in understanding and implementation of these regulations have occurred, causing a negative impact on social security. According to the Government Inspectorate, between 2003 and 2010, State administrative agencies received and dealt with over 1.2 million letters of complaints and denunciations, of which those relating to land issues accounted for nearly 70%.

Causes of the problem have also been defined, including inadequate policies and laws on the land, shortcomings in administrative decisions, weaknesses in the execution of land regulations and the degradation of officials in relevant State agencies. Besides, there are a lot of inconsistencies and overlaps between the Land Law and the dozens of other land-related legal documents ratified in recent years.

Land disputes, especially in site clearance, compensation and resettlement, have captured the attention of local media during discussions of NA deputies this week. Most deputies have blasted the current regulations, saying that these rules are going against the Land Law, which stipulates that land belongs to the people and the State acts on behalf of the people to own and manage it. In fact, compensation prices for land are much lower than market prices, which is the main cause of too many land-related complaints over the past few years.

Even worse, the inconsistency of land law has created long and complicated petitions between land users and projects’ developers. Therefore, there are concerns that Land Law amendments will be meaningless unless they have solved outstanding land confiscation and compensation bottlenecks.

As reported on Vietnamnet, deputy Duong Hoang Huong from Phu Tho Province, says that the wrong economic development viewpoint of local authorities is the culprit of wrongful land confiscation. There is a paradox that some localities who are not strong in industrial development have still insisted on expanding industry in recent years, developing vast areas of land into industrial parks regardless of land owners. As a consequence, the localities have failed to lure investors to those industrial parks while farmers have lost their farming land with paltry monetary insurance.

Compensation and resettlement are also a big problem. NA deputies as quoted by Vietnamnet points out that the maximum land price limits regulated by local authorities are much lower than actual prices on the market. The difference may be up to 40% to 70% in large cities like Hanoi and HCMC. In addition, support for resettlement is not adequate for the loss of livelihood of displaced households who are forgotten about after handing over their land to urban or industrial projects.

Deputy Le Viet Truong from An Giang Province said that land owners should also enjoy compensation created from farmland being renovated into urban areas as all profits are going to the pockets of project developers. While many investors have enriched themselves from these projects, needy farmers have been pushed into great hardship for losing productive land and receiving unsatisfactory compensation. This unfair practice will accelerate and the gap between the rich and the poor will widen.

Tran Van Tan, a NA deputy from Tien Giang Province, says that land prices should be decided by the State in line with market forces. State management should be reinforced in land planning and use. Land which is used ineffectively or for improper purposes should be reclaimed. Any violation of land law or case of corruption needs to be severely punished. Land acquisition, compensation, and resettlement support should be democratic, transparent and realistic.

Pham Sy Liem, vice chairman of the Vietnam Construction Federation, is quoted by Nguoi Lao Dong as saying that the “fair price” rule should be replaced by “market price” rule in defining land compensation prices for owners. Fair price is the price that can create assets equivalent to land taken plus interest brought by the project.

As justice for land owners must be the top priority to secure social security and economic growth, Minister of Natural Resources and Environment Nguyen Minh Quang stresses the crucial task in amending the Land Law and related documents.

“In the next session, we will submit to the NA a draft of the revised Land Law. We need to establish a database on land management. It’s essential we can successfully settle disputes and petitions at grassroots level before taking them higher. Information campaigns on the Land Law for land users also need to be stepped up.” Quang says.

Source: SaigonTimes.