【禁闻】承包荒岛二十年 政府称合同无效

FacebookPrintFont Size繁体

【新唐人2013年10月17日讯】广东省海陵镇政府,二十年前为完成国家下达的植树造林任务,而找到“滩涂养殖大王”李宗岑,请他帮忙,把光秃秃的南鹏岛绿化、造林,双方并且签订70年承包合同。然而,二十年之后,海陵岛经济开发区管委会声称,这份合同无效,并且将李宗岑告上法庭,法院判定官方胜诉。李宗岑不服判决提出上诉。二审已在日前开庭。

备受关注的“阳江官民争岛案”,10月14号在阳江中级法院二审开庭。20年前签订的海岛承包开发合同,如今是否有效?原告、被告两造继续展开辩论。

据《南方都市报》报导,上诉方——“岛主”李宗岑,坚持“合同合法有效”。而作为被上诉方——阳江市海陵岛经济开发试验区管委会、和阳江市海洋与渔业局,则提交七份新证据,指称﹕李宗岑的行为属于变相侵占国家资源,从中牟利,其中,放养牛羊等行为,还破坏了岛上生态环境。

经过一天的激烈辩论,审判长提议调解,但李宗岑与他的律师当庭表示:“合同有效无效,关乎黑白是非,关乎正义”,拒绝调解。法院表示,近日将作出判决结果。

被告李宗岑律师——“广东经纶律师事务所”律师冉茜告诉《新唐人》,原告方认为合同无效,他们援引的是1988年土地管理法第17条,也就是,利用国有荒山荒地滩涂进行农业承包的话,必须要经县级以上政府的批准。对方一口咬定,这个承包合同没有经过县级政府的批准。

广东经纶律师事务所律师冉茜:“但是我们那份合同有县级的林业局作为见证人,有盖章,有签字的。而且这份合同还到县级专门管理农村承包合同的管理处,去办理了一个监证,监证方还收了监证的费用,也有签字和盖章。那么,我们认为,这两个县级政府主管部门见证和监证的行为,实际上就代表了县级政府对这个合同有效性的认可了。”

冉茜说,林业局作为主管林业工作的一个主管部门,是它作为见证方来牵头、主导,并且起草合同,在法律上,林业局的行为就代表了政府的行为。但是现在,县政府向法庭出具一纸证明说,没有同意签署这份合同。

冉茜表示,合同签署的时候,部门内部有没有一个审批手续,那是你政府内部的一个流程。

冉茜:“即使退一步说,你没有去完善这个手续,那也是你原告方的责任,你有义务去完善这个手续。你不能说,哦,我这个合同已经履行了二十年了,你说我的这个内部手续没有完善,所以我来宣布这个合同无效。这在法律上它是违背了最基本的一个原则,就是诚实信用的原则。”

冉茜认为,不诚信的行为在法律上都是禁止的,更何况政府的诚信。

冉茜:“你政府你本来就是应该维护交易的稳定性,维护交易市场的秩序。结果它看到了海岛开发的利益,觉得这个岛,现在,如果政府收回去,给其他更好的一些投资人来进行开发,当地政府可以获得更多的利益。它是基于这样一个考虑,所以想把这个岛拿回去。”

冉茜指出,原来的南鹏岛是一个荒岛,几乎没有什么植被。1992年,国家有一个绿化纲要,它把绿化造林的工作,层层下达到各级政府。这份合同已经履行了20年了,当事人作出巨大的投入。

冉茜:“当时的海陵镇政府,这个南鹏岛是它管辖的一个岛,它没有这个钱去搞这个岛的绿化造林,所以就找到我们当事人,就说把这个岛承包给我们当事人,然后由他去实施绿化造林的工作。我们当事人签了这个合同之后,就去做了很多工作,这个岛现在已经很漂亮了。”

这份合同的第四条规定,如果国家要把海岛收回去,必须对当事人进行相应的补偿和赔偿。冉茜猜测,现在海陵镇政府不想进行民事赔偿,所以干脆说合同无效,这样他们就不需要给予太多的赔偿。

采访编辑/秦雪 后制/萧宇

The Government Denies A 70-Year Contract in Order to Repossess Island

20 years ago, in order to carry out state-assigned tasks
for afforestation, the Hailing Township government
in Guangdong Province contracted desolate Nanpeng Island
to businessman Li Zongcen, a marine poultry producer.
The contract period was set for 70 years.

However since 2011, Hailing Development Committee
(HDC) claimed the contract was invalid and brought Li
to court.

The trial’s verdict was in favor of the authority.

Li appealed the verdict.
The appeal trial has begun recently.

On Oct. 14, Yangjiang Intermediate People’s Court opened
the second trial of Li Zongcen versus
the regime regarding the Island dispute.

Will the contract signed 20 years ago be valid?
Both plaintiff and defendant continuously debate in court.

Southern Metropolis Daily reported that prosecutor
Li Zongcen insists the contract is legal and valid.
HDC and Yangjiang Administration of Ocean and Fishery
provided the court with seven new pieces of evidence.
The evidence allegedly shows that Li has used state
resources, has taken personal gains, and has populated
the island with cows and sheep, which damaged
the island environment.

After a day of debate, the judge suggested the use
of mediation in resolving disputes.
Li and his lawyer replied in court, “Whether the contract
is valid or not relates to issue of right or wrong,
and it also relates to the issue of justice or not."

Li did not accept the mediation service.
The court said that final verdict will be issued soon.

Li’s lawyer, Ran Xi from Geenen Foreign Legal Service
Center, spoke to NTD.
She says the authorities believe the contract is invalid.

They cited 1988 Land Management Law Article 17,
which says only county-level regimes or
above have the authority to contract inhabited islands
to individuals.
They said this contract hasn’t been approved
by county-level regimes.

Ran Xi: “Actually, the county-level forestry bureau can serve
as a witness because they sealed and signed the contract.
This contract has been certified by a county-level
management bureau, rural area contract department.
We paid certifying fees and it was signed and sealed.

We certainly believe these two regimes represent
county-level authorities to validate the contract."

Ran Xi says that the forestry bureau is a part of the main
administration, they certify and prepare contracts.
By law, the forestry bureau works on behalf
of the government.
Now the county government submitted a statement saying
they didn’t agree that they have signed a contract.

Ran Xi also says when the regimes signed the contract,
there was no examination and approval procedures,
and they didn’t have a proper internal system.

Ran Xi: “Taking a step back, it is their responsibility
for not having a complete system.
They are obligated to complete internal procedures.

My client has fulfilled the contract for 20 years,
they cannot simply say due to the imperfections of their
internal system the contract is invalid.
It breaches a basic legal principle—honesty."

Ran Xi believes that dishonesty is even prohibited
by law, let alone the government’s action.

Ran Xi: “The government should maintain a trading stability,
and maintain market order.
Now they want to have personal gains
by developing the island.
If they repossess the island and pass it down to better
investors, the local regime can obtain more interests.
This is what they plan to do, thus they hope
to repossess the island."

Ran Xi points out that the original island was desolate,
and there was almost no vegetation.
In 1992, the state issued a green outline plan.

They conveyed the plan to different layers governments
including the local level.
The contract has been fulfilled for 20 years,
Li has invested a lot.

Ran Xi: “At that time, Nanpeng Island belonged
to the Hailing government administration.
They didn’t have funds to plant trees for afforestation.

They found Li Zongcen and contracted the island to him.
Li managed the afforestation.

After Li signed the contract he put in a lot of hard work,
now the island has been transformed into a beautiful scene."

The fourth term in the contract states that if the state
repossesses the island, they need to compensate Li.
Ran Xi speculates that Hailing regime doesn’t want to carry
out civil compensation, so they claim the contract is invalid.
In this way, they won’t need to pay much compensation.

相关文章
评论