“司法强拆”可否走出征收困局

发布时间：2018-05-01 13:40

本文选题：房屋拆迁征收 + 强制执行模式　；参考：《法学》2012年04期

【摘要】：1991年、2001年国务院两部《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》均确立了"行政强拆"与"司法强拆"双轨制立法模式,在立法层面较好地兼顾了公正与效率的价值。然而在地方强拆实务操作层面,则倾向于选择以"行政强拆"、"先行(予)执行"为主的效率模式。2011年国务院出台的《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例》改采"司法强拆"单轨制立法模式,在彰显公正价值之余,却不当舍弃了公益征收背景下应予关注的效率价值,同时也忽视了司法执行中本备受批评的窘境。本文通过新旧条例对房屋强拆立法模式变迁及实务问题的疏理,指出当下问题的关键不在于"行政强拆"还是"司法强拆",而在于强拆目的是否限于公共利益,征收补偿是否公平合理,以及政府、法院动用国家强制力剥夺百姓安身立命之所,是否兼顾了公益与私益、公权与私权、公正与效率的适度平衡。
[Abstract]:In 1991 and 2001, the two regulations of the State Council of the State Council on the Administration of Urban Housing demolition both established the two-track legislative model of "administrative forced demolition" and "judicial forced demolition", which took into account the value of justice and efficiency in the legislative level. However, at the operational level of local forced demolitions, In 2011, the State Council issued the regulations on Housing Collection and compensation on State-owned Land to adopt the legislative model of "judicial forced demolition" monorail system. While demonstrating the value of justice, it unjustly forgets the efficiency value which should be paid attention to in the background of public interest expropriation, and ignores the dilemma which has been criticized in the course of judicial execution. This paper points out that the key of the present problem is not "administrative forced demolition" or "judicial forced demolition", but whether the purpose of forced demolition is limited to public interest. Whether the expropriation compensation is fair and reasonable, and whether the government, the courts use the state coercive power to deprive the people of the place to settle down, whether the public and private interests, public rights and private rights, justice and efficiency of the appropriate balance.
【作者单位】：上海市长宁区人民法院;
【基金】：2011年度上海市法学会青年课题“《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例》施行后对现行房地产法律制度之影响——以房屋征收拆迁强制执行制度及实务问题为视角”的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D922.181;D926

【共引文献】