SHANGHAI - The Hollywood blockbuster Avatar is popular across the world,
with US$2.21 billion in worldwide ticket sales. In China it has been a smash
hit despite its 2-D version being pulled from some cinemas as it was drawing
audiences away from the officially approved film Confucius.
Some Western media reports have claimed that the 2-D version was banned by the
authorities as they saw parallels between the movie's depiction of the Na'vi
people being forcibly relocated on their planet, Pandora, and government
land-grabs in China. One blogger said the science-fiction epic was an allegory
for "nail houses" - households that refuse to be relocated under pressure from
developers. The term derives from a famous case in which a
solitary family held up the development of a shopping mall in Chongqing,
southwest China.
Avatar has a happy ending: the Na'vi people successfully drive off the
invaders. There is also a ray of hope for China's land-grab victims: the
government is finally revising relocation rules that at present virtually allow
authorized developers to take away private homes with little or no compensation
and without the consent of the residents. These rules, effective since 1991,
have led to numerous protests, riots and deaths during forced relocations.
The State Council, the cabinet, promises that the proposed changes include
increased compensation for property owners and a ban on violence in the
relocation process. The revised rules decree that local authorities hold public
hearings before relocations. They also ban relocation teams from cutting off
water, heat, gas or power supplies to residents who refuse to leave - tactics
frequently used by relocation workers.
The new rules also give residents the right to challenge evictions in the
courts and developers will be banned from forcing residents out while such a
lawsuit is ongoing. This is a major change from the current rules that allow
developers to demolish an area while a case is pending.
The changes came after years of protests by urban dwellers who have lost their
homes to massive urban redevelopment projects. In December last year, five
Chinese academics wrote to the central government saying that confiscating
private homes was in breach of the constitution and property laws, which
stipulate that private property is inviolable.
In China, the government legally controls all land. The current relocation
rules allow it to demolish urban homes and claim the land in the name of
"public interest". Because the state legally owns the land, often residents are
only compensated with the construction costs of their apartments.
In the name of so-called "public interest", old neighborhoods are razed to make
way for office towers and seemingly endless rows of the high-rise apartment
buildings that are favored by the nouveau riche. The onslaught of development
has caused hardship for countless families and individuals pushed aside to make
way for this "progress". The interests of the rising middle class have also
been affected, with the government at times pulling down shops, factories or
brand-new apartment buildings and giving only symbolic compensation.
In one extreme case, on November 13 last year 47-year-old Tang Fuzhen from
Chengdu, capital of southwestern Sichuan province, set herself on fire to
protest the forced demolition of her factory building. Tang died in hospital 16
days later. The incident was filmed and shown on the Internet, leading to a
national scandal.
The Chengdu municipal government later insisted that the demolition was lawful.
On January 28, one day before the new rules were publicized, a 60-year-old man
in east China's Jiangsu province set himself on fire to protest the
government's decision to build a road at the site of his home. The man is
currently receiving treatment in hospital, along with his daughter who was
injured trying to put out the fire.
In some cases, government officials collude with developers to make big profits
from high-rise apartment blocks, with local thugs hired to evict residents.
Demolishing private homes is a profitable business: a former head of a
demolishing team recently told the media that he had earned 9 million yuan
(US$1.31 million) from the business over 12 years.
China's urban population was 607 million in 2008, more than triple the figure
in 1978 when the country began its reform and opening-up, according to official
figures. The rapid expansion of cities has led to endless urban redevelopment
projects. In the first eight years, after the State Council released the Rules
on Urban Housing Demolition in 1991, in Shanghai more than 580,000 homes were
demolished with more than two million people evicted.
Sometimes even new buildings are demolished. In Fuzhou, provincial capital of
Fujian, a brand-new primary school completed in September 2009 at a cost of 15
million yuan faces demolition because the government wants to turn the area
into a business district. Not far away, a four-year-old housing estate also
faces demolition, with its residents startled to find that their homes had been
defined by the government as "aging buildings that need improvements".
In the past, the plight of the evicted was often covered up by local
governments, but since the infamous case of the "nail house", the Internet has
emerged as a means for whistleblowers to turn forced relocations into national
scandals.
The government's new rules on evictions have been given a mixed welcome by
China's Internet community, with 42% of respondents to an online survey
conducted by the popular website Sohu.com saying that the draft regulations
wouldn't solve anything.
It is also unclear how local government will interpret the new rules when it
comes to their implementation.
The proposed rules still allow the government to take away people's homes in
the name of "public interest", though they narrow down the scope of "public
interest" and include promises to compensate homeowners according to market
values.
Seven categories are listed that constitute "public interest", including
national defense projects, important public projects, the rebuilding of old and
dangerous buildings, the construction of government offices and other projects
deemed necessary by law or the State Council.
Although the proposed regulations require the government to hold public
hearings before seizing homes for "public interest", some fear that public
hearings, like most in China, would become little more than a sham.
Even as the new proposed regulation is under consultation, local governments
and real estate developers have sped up demolitions to avoid paying higher
levels of compensation should the law be adopted.
In Beijing, an area that is traditionally home to artists called "Chuang Yi
Zheng Yang" faces demolition. The artists have refused to move even though
their water and heating supplies have been cut off for more than a month. After
a rare public protest from the artists attracted media attention, the Beijing
municipal government - which initially refused to give any compensation - has
agreed to pay the artists 5 million yuan.
Behind the changes in the relocation rules is an increasing awareness of
private ownership rights. The proposed changes, if approved, will probably help
residents get higher levels of compensation. In richer cities, some urban
redevelopment projects have turned private owners into billionaires overnight.
In the boom town of Shenzhen, where original land and property owners receive
the market value or even higher prices for demolished homes, the recent
demolition of a community in the city center created 10 billionaires, with the
residents compensated over 10,000 yuan for each square meter of their
demolished property.
Stephen Wong is a freelance journalist from Shanghai.
(Copyright 2010 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
