Land expropriation: Compensation must be greater than the value of the land seized.

'If land is reclaimed with adequate compensation that benefits the people, then no one will argue about it.'

The 6th session of the 13th National Assembly devoted considerable time to discussing and analyzing the draft Law on Land (amended). The issue of land compensation prices when land is reclaimed was of great concern to many voters and delegates.

Source: VOV

According to delegate Dong Huu Mao (Thua Thien-Hue delegation), if land is reclaimed with adequate compensation that benefits the people, no one will argue. The delegate also argued that the compensation regulations in the draft are inadequate. “Perhaps we should include a regulation stating that those whose land is reclaimed should be compensated with a value of land use rights greater than the value of the land itself. In my opinion, this could be 1.3 times the value set by the Administrative Committee for annual land prices, because land prices never equal market value. Compensation must be adequate, must ensure the value of the reclaimed land, and must be higher than the value of the land itself,” delegate Dong Huu Mao stated.

In reality, land valuation is an extremely sensitive and complex issue directly affecting the interests of the state, businesses, and millions of citizens. This is also the fundamental reason for the emergence of protracted, persistent, intense, and highly complicated lawsuits.

According to delegate Huynh Nghia (Da Nang delegation), Point e, Clause 1, Article 112, which stipulates that land prices regulated by the state must be consistent with prevailing market prices, still lacks clarity and transparency. Because market land prices are unstable and constantly changing, sometimes even fluctuating daily, determining what constitutes "consistent with market prices" is entirely subjective. The concept of "prevailing land prices" is also vague, making it difficult to define a benchmark.

In many places, the land price framework set by the state does not reflect market prices, and compensation prices do not accurately reflect the actual value of land sold by people. Therefore, regulations on land valuation consulting are essential. However, it is necessary to encourage the widespread use of organizations with land valuation consulting functions in the valuation process. Regulations should not stipulate that land valuations determined by consultants are only for reference purposes when requested by competent state agencies. Only then will land valuation be based on scientific principles, objectivity, honesty, and ensure a balance of interests between the state, businesses, and the people.

"I propose that the concept of significant fluctuations in market land prices needs to be clarified in Clause 1, Article 113. The law should immediately stipulate by what percentage of market land price fluctuations would allow for adjustments to the land price framework, in order to ensure transparency and openness," said Representative Huynh Nghia.

Sharing this view, delegate La Ngoc Thoang (Cao Bang delegation) argued that the concept of "consistent with prevailing market land prices" is merely a change in wording and lacks any real difference, transparency, and clarity, easily leading to subjective interpretations. The delegate suggested that for effective land valuation consultation, it should be mandated for cases involving the construction or adjustment of land price frameworks, land price tables, specific land valuations, or the resolution of land price complaints. The draft law also fails to clearly define the process, sequence, and procedures for determining land prices.

"Because of this lack of clarity, each province sets its own land price. For example, surveys of the same area, even those separated by just a small road, result in different compensation rates. Compensation for crops is unreasonably set, with compensation insufficient to purchase a resettlement plot. This creates a loophole that allows for undervaluation of land below market price, easily exploited for group interests, and leading to complaints," the representative stated, highlighting the reality.

Offering a different perspective, Representative Le Trong Sang (from Ho Chi Minh City delegation) argued that the draft law still maintains two methods of land acquisition: state acquisition in Articles 61 and 62, and the method of investors receiving land use rights through transfer, lease, or capital contribution for production and business in Article 73 of the draft law. This inevitably leads to a dual land price mechanism: land prices set by the state and land prices negotiated by investors, making land disputes unavoidable.

Sharing this view, delegate La Ngoc Thoang argued that requiring businesses to negotiate compensation prices was a major obstacle in the 2003 Land Law. Private businesses only consider profit when making compensation payments, and once the issue is resolved, they consider the well-being of the people and the social consequences. Ultimately, the state bears the responsibility and the burden of these consequences.

Land reclamation and forced eviction

Representative Nguyen Bac Viet (Ninh Thuan delegation) suggested reconsidering the use of the term "land reclamation." He argued that land reclamation should only be applied in cases of violations of land use laws. In cases of voluntary land allocation, land donation, and most cases where the state makes a decision to change land use rights, the land is generally complied with. Therefore, the state receives the land, not reclaims it.

"In the articles and chapters, and especially Chapter VI on land reclamation, land expropriation, and compensation, the phrase 'change of land use rights' should be replaced. Land reclamation is only appropriate in cases of legal violations," said the representative from North Vietnam.

Representative Pham Truong Dan (Quang Nam delegation) expressed agreement with the view of land reclamation due to violations of land law. However, the representative suggested that clearer regulations are needed, and stronger sanctions could be imposed on cases of stalled projects where the investor, under urgent circumstances, breaks ground, builds fences, gates, internal roads, warehouses, offices, etc., to prolong the project for many years while waiting to sell it, without installing machinery, equipment, or putting it into production as planned. In such cases, the land should be resolutely reclaimed without compensation for assets on the land. In cases of non-compliance with the land reclamation decision of the competent authority, coercive measures must be implemented.

Representative Pham Truong Dan also proposed adding a principle of coercive measures: "When implementing coercive measures, caution and strict adherence to legal procedures are necessary, ensuring security and order, preventing complications, and avoiding coercive measures at sensitive times that could negatively impact politics, such as during holidays, when family members of those whose land is being confiscated are experiencing funerals, anniversaries, weddings, accidents, serious illnesses, etc."

The draft law should also include provisions for enforcement in cases involving large numbers of people and complex enforcement situations, assigning the Chairman of the District People's Committee as the head of the enforcement committee. The enforcement plan should be approved by the Provincial People's Committee, the District Police Chief should develop a plan to ensure security and order, and the Director of each province should approve this plan. Simultaneously, it should stipulate that the District People's Procuracy and prosecutors monitor and supervise the enforcement process to ensure compliance with the law.

Representative Huynh Nghia (from Da Nang delegation) also expressed his support for the policy of reclaiming land due to violations of land laws. "This regulation is reasonable, aiming to ensure discipline in land use and avoid wasting land resources," the representative emphasized.

Furthermore, many opinions suggest that when land is reclaimed for socio-economic development purposes, it must be clearly and reasonably defined to avoid abuse for private or group interests. To achieve this, more specific and detailed regulations are needed because the draft law includes many cases that are easily exploited during implementation, such as land reclamation for industrial zones, export processing zones, and new urban areas.

According to VOV