Chinese nix property law
Monday, March 5, 2007
GONG XIANTIAN is on a mission to save Chinese Marxism, but it is one that looks more likely than ever to fail with a new law that provides unprecedented protection for the private sector.
The Property Law, the most controversial in Chinese history, is all but certain to be passed after the nation's 3,000 legislators gather on Monday in Beijing, but Gong wants them to think twice before pushing the "yes" button.
"If the people's representatives don't represent the real interests and aspirations of the people, and pass this law without paying attention to the opposition to it, it will be an historic step backwards," he said.
"It won't be a very glorious page in the history of Chinese legislation," Gong told AFP, sitting in his study lined with the works of communist heroes such as Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin.
The deceptively innocuous-sounding law has been through a record seven readings, and has been the subject of criticism and proposals from 47 government departments and a staggering 11,500 members of the public.
Still, many are not happy with it, finding it either too strongly worded or not strong enough.
The law aims to offer protection to both private and public ownership, although state media have indicated it will place public ownership "at the core of the economic system".
This nod to socialist ideology could be the result of vocal opposition organised by Gong, who many say was instrumental in removing the law from last year's legislative agenda.
What really impressed the government was an open letter Gong drafted to top legislator Wu Bangguo, which carried 3,274 signatures, including those of former ministers, retired provincial chiefs and demobilised senior military officers.
"Everyone is concerned about this draft law, because it impacts the interests of a large number of people," said Zuo Dapei, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
"Some leftists and old conservative members of the Communist Party believe the draft devalues public ownership and does not come up with good enough protections for it," said Zuo, who also opposes the law in its current form.
Supporters of the Property Law say it will protect private companies against economic crime, such as embezzlement by their own staff.
Opponents, on the other hand, argue the law will help corrupt officials and other lawbreakers protect their ill-gotten gains.
"We're not against the protection of private property ... but the problem is a lot of private property in China today isn't legally obtained. This would leave an extremely erroneous historical legacy," said Gong.
On a more general level, the Property Law is seen as treason against the ideals which guided Mao Zedong and his comrades when they founded the People's Republic of China in 1949. "Of course, you can't make hypothetical statements about history, but if Mao Zedong had been alive today, there's no way a law like this would have emerged," Gong said.
Proponents of the bill, however, see little choice but to seek a firmer legal basis for the protection of the entire range of ownership forms now in existence, private or state, whether they were foreseen by Marxism or not.
For instance, murky definitions about who owns what are at the heart of some of modern China's most serious conflicts, such as bloody clashes over land user rights. "In a socialist country, you also need protection of private property," said Gu Ming'an, a law professor at the Southwestern University of Finance and Economics.
"And it doesn't matter whether you're rich or poor, the law will protect your property regardless."
AFP
The Property Law, the most controversial in Chinese history, is all but certain to be passed after the nation's 3,000 legislators gather on Monday in Beijing, but Gong wants them to think twice before pushing the "yes" button.
"If the people's representatives don't represent the real interests and aspirations of the people, and pass this law without paying attention to the opposition to it, it will be an historic step backwards," he said.
"It won't be a very glorious page in the history of Chinese legislation," Gong told AFP, sitting in his study lined with the works of communist heroes such as Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin.
The deceptively innocuous-sounding law has been through a record seven readings, and has been the subject of criticism and proposals from 47 government departments and a staggering 11,500 members of the public.
Still, many are not happy with it, finding it either too strongly worded or not strong enough.
The law aims to offer protection to both private and public ownership, although state media have indicated it will place public ownership "at the core of the economic system".
This nod to socialist ideology could be the result of vocal opposition organised by Gong, who many say was instrumental in removing the law from last year's legislative agenda.
What really impressed the government was an open letter Gong drafted to top legislator Wu Bangguo, which carried 3,274 signatures, including those of former ministers, retired provincial chiefs and demobilised senior military officers.
"Everyone is concerned about this draft law, because it impacts the interests of a large number of people," said Zuo Dapei, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
"Some leftists and old conservative members of the Communist Party believe the draft devalues public ownership and does not come up with good enough protections for it," said Zuo, who also opposes the law in its current form.
Supporters of the Property Law say it will protect private companies against economic crime, such as embezzlement by their own staff.
Opponents, on the other hand, argue the law will help corrupt officials and other lawbreakers protect their ill-gotten gains.
"We're not against the protection of private property ... but the problem is a lot of private property in China today isn't legally obtained. This would leave an extremely erroneous historical legacy," said Gong.
On a more general level, the Property Law is seen as treason against the ideals which guided Mao Zedong and his comrades when they founded the People's Republic of China in 1949. "Of course, you can't make hypothetical statements about history, but if Mao Zedong had been alive today, there's no way a law like this would have emerged," Gong said.
Proponents of the bill, however, see little choice but to seek a firmer legal basis for the protection of the entire range of ownership forms now in existence, private or state, whether they were foreseen by Marxism or not.
For instance, murky definitions about who owns what are at the heart of some of modern China's most serious conflicts, such as bloody clashes over land user rights. "In a socialist country, you also need protection of private property," said Gu Ming'an, a law professor at the Southwestern University of Finance and Economics.
"And it doesn't matter whether you're rich or poor, the law will protect your property regardless."
AFP
Business Besides Oil
