Research on the Justification of the Control of Agricultural Land Separation-Conflict Between the Policy of the Constitution of Farmer's Property Rights

• Main Authors: Hong, Jui-Kuo, 洪瑞國
• Other Authors: Liao, I-Ming
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/6h69ed

碩士 === 國立高雄大學 === 政治法律學系碩士班 === 106 === The people’s property rights can be divided into Obligations , Rights In Rem , intangible asset rights, and public law returning claims. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the property rights, like other human inborn powers, had absolute control over the use of dispositions. Absolute freedom was enjoyed, but the views on property rights changed somewhat after the 20th century, and it was held that the obligation imposed by the state on the exercise of property rights based on the public interest, if not excessive, was still permitted by the Constitution, which was the social obligation of property rights. Restrictions on property rights are generally required to be retained by principle of legal reservation and must not violate the principle of proportionality and the principle of improper connection forbidden, unless otherwise stipulated by the statute, and the statute of restriction must be adopted by the Parliament on third reading, and must comply with the constitutional necessity, public welfare and the principle of non-compliance with the principle of proportionality, or if it is declared unconstitutional and ceases to apply, it may impose restrictions on the people's property rights. Under the premise that current policy mining property rights are socially obligatory, today’s administrators often use this as a basis for the formulation and implementation of policies and then impose obligations on the people’s property and limit the right to control the people’s property rights. The extent of minorities that do not exceed social obligations should be tolerated. According to historical opinions, there is no violation of the constitutional provisions that guarantee the protection of people’s property rights. Like land policies, land is also a common property right that is subject to social obligations. For example, The 37.5% Arable Rent Reduction Act. restricts landlord property rights, the proportion of statutory open land in construction sites, and Article 16 of Agricultural Development Act stipulates that the parcel of land after the arable land is divided is subject to a minimum area. Limits on the number of pens...etc. Since the land use department is most often subjected to social obligations, it is worth discussing whether or not all social obligations of land and property are necessary, whether there is a principle of proportionality, and whether the means and purpose are relevant. This study will make a preliminary discussion on the current system of agricultural land segmentation, starting with the constitutional property rights restrictions, and summarizing the land control policy, and then examining the current restrictions on agricultural land and arable land segmentation, and implementing the practice of the current land registration authority. Cases of disputes, with relevant practitioners through in-depth interviews, to explore the rationality and necessity of segmentation restrictions on agricultural land, so that China's land resources can be properly used, and improve the efficiency of land registration agencies, and rationalize the value of land transactions, in the national land policy Balance points with people’s land property rights.