Vietnamnet.vn
Podcast
Doan Van Vuon's house.
The meeting was held one month after 49-year-old farmer Le Van Vuon acted violently against the local authorities’ decision to withdraw more than 40 hectares of land allocated to his family in 1993. According to the authorities, the allocation term was over in 2007.
In protest, Vuon and his family members shot and injured 6 police officers who were taking part in the forced removal on January 5.
After meeting with Dien, Luan told Tuoi Tre that the city leader focused on the legal bases of Tien Lang authorities in land allocation, withdrawal, complaint settlement and forced removal.
“I told Dien that the district authorities had allocated land to the right person, for the right purpose and according to the right competence, but such allocation was wrong in terms of the duration of land allocation under the 1993 Land on Law,” Luan said.
“Regarding the decision on land revocation, I asserted to the city leader that all such decisions were against the law since the authorities have not paid compensation to those having their land reclaimed, have withdrawn the land while the land users wanted to continue using the land, and had not re-allocated the withdrawn land.”
It is undeniable that the land withdrawn is agricultural. of. Under the law, when the allocation term is over, if land users wish to continue using it, the authorities must allow them to, Luan said.
“The city leader did not give any conclusion during our talk. He did not commenton Vuon’s story, either,” Luan said.
Five proposals
Luan said he, on behalf of hundreds of farmers in Tien Lang, had referred five proposals to the city leader.
First, the city People’s Committee should order the district authorities to revoke all decisions on land revocation that have been issued wrongly to local farmers.
Second, the Tien Lang authorities must also revoke the two decisions of forced removal imposed on Doan Van Vuon and another farmer, Vu Van Luan.
Third, the authorities should re-assign the withdrawn land to the farmers concerned so that they can resume their agricultural production activities.
Fourth, the district authorities must pay Vuon’s family for damage caused by their forced removal.
Fifth, all those who were involved in the destruction of the house of Vuon’s family must be prosecuted.
Previously, the Tien Lang authorities said that the land allocated to Vuon was not agricultural land since, by the time of allocation, the land was “alluvial land on a river bank” that had been unused, and therefore, the land had to be taken back when the term of land allocation was over.
The authorities said that Vuon can use the land again if he leases it from the authorities, but Vuon did not agree.
Vuon’s land is agricultural land: city official
Meanwhile, at the meeting with the Vietnam Farmers Union February 2, Dan Duc Hiep, standing deputy chairman of city People’s Committee, acknowledged that Vuon’s land is of the agricultural category.
“It isn’t wrong to say Vuon’s land is farming land, but an important issue here is that whether or not the land was allocated under Decree 64 [which provides regulations on allocating agricultural land to households and individuals for long-term stable use in agricultural production], Hiep said.
He also said the decision for land revocation issued in 2009 to Vuon was not aimed at using the land for a project to build an international airport as said by Hoang Anh Tuan, head of the Tien Lang Party Committee’s Commission for Mass Mobilization, at the January 19 meeting with a supervision team of the Vietnam Fatherland Front’s Central Committee.
“It was not until 2011 that Do Trung Thoai, deputy chairman of the city People’s Committee approved new planning in Tien Lang, in which a project to build an airport is expected to cover Vuon’s land,” Hiep explained.
However, at a meeting with the press on February 3 about the city’s policy on land use, Hiep said, “Lots of lands of which the allocation terms are over must be taken back and would be leased to farmers. Priority in land lease will be given to farming households who have feasible production projects and have previously fulfilled their payment obligations to the State.”
Such a policy was effected by the district People’s Committee by its Decision 3756 dated October 17, 2008, but the decision was asked to be suspended by the city Justice Department in 2009, since it is against Item 1 of Article 67 and Item 10 of Article 38 of the Law on Land.
Talking with Tuoi Tre last Saturday, many aquaculture households in Tien Lang said they were not content with the decision. “We don’t understand why such an unlawful decision is still considered by one of the Hai Phong city leaders as the city’s policy,” an aquaculture farmer said.
Earlier, Doan Van Vuon asked to be represented by a lawyer in court.
In related news, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung will chair a meeting about the violent protest against the repossession of public land rent to residents in Tien Lang District. The meeting is expected to last from February 6 to 10.
Before the meeting takes place, Deputy Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc has requested the Government Inspectorate, the ministries of Natural Resources and Environment, Public Security, Agriculture and Rural Development, and Justice to review the case and prepare solutions to the problem.
The chairman of the Hai Phong City People’s Committee was also requested to prepare detailed reports about the case.
Phuc also asked the Vietnam Fatherland Front Central Committee, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme Procuracy and the Vietnam Farmers’ Association to submit their opinions.
Tuoitre
.svg){kind=icon}
