option

option
Farmers show all are equal in front of the law

2005-03-24
China Daily

A group of farmers from Wuxi, East China's Jiangsu Province, won a lawsuit against the Ministry of Land and Resources recently. The Beijing No 1 Intermediate People's Court ruled last Friday that the ministry should consider the farmers' applications and rethink its approval of a local land requisition case.

Such a result has aroused public attention nationwide. Here are comments from the Chinese media:

China Economic Times: This is not the first time that a ministry-level department has been sued, and not the first time for it to lose the case either.

But every such case attracts much public attention. People take delight in talking about the farmers' courage and wisdom in suing the ministry.

When resorting to legal means to fight for one's rights is not a common practice among the public, such a case and victory provides a valuable lesson.

In terms of power and knowledge, the 150 farmers cannot compete with the Ministry of Land and Resources. The Beijing No 1 Intermediate People's Court is also a local court that cannot compare with the ministry in official rank or resources.

But all entities are equal before the law, something that has been brought home with this case.

The law cannot guarantee that everyone enjoys the same resources at birth. But it guarantees that everyone has to abide by the same rules. When our rights are harmed, we can appeal to the law for protection.

The farmers' victory shows us that everyone is equal in front of the law. And together with good laws, and courts that dispense the laws justly, citizens who are willing to fight for their rights are able to bring about justice.

Dahe Daily: Though this case has only passed its first hurdle, and the final result of the administrative reconsideration is still not known, the case shows the progress in restricting administrative power.

Facing similar lawsuits, some courts may extricate themselves with an excuse that the case is "not in its range of acceptance." But the Beijing No 1 Intermediate People's Court took the Ministry of Land and Resources as an ordinary defendant that is no more important than the farmers, and decided according to the law. Its decision protects the interests and rights of the farmers and increases our confidence in the law and justice. The court deserves applause.

The ruling allows us to see the important role that courts can play in mediating between the public and government departments. Social conflict is unavoidable, but as long as the courts can dispense the laws justly, social stability and harmony are achievable.

The case can also enlighten disadvantaged farmers. They know that when they take collective action they can achieve a better result. A collective voice is always louder than an individual's.

Guangzhou Daily: More social disputes should be resolved through legal channels. Citizens should be encouraged to appeal to the law for the protection of their rights and the courts should provide them with access to the law.

The case shows that the farmers' legal knowledge was not poor. The four representatives of the 150 farmers were over 60 years old on average, but their performances were as good as the legal professionals in court.

And they were given equality, which will encourage more people to use the law to protect their rights.

A successful legal system has more use than any books or preaching.

What is more, though only one case, the farmers' victory sends a warning to government departments that they need to perform their duties according to the law. Otherwise, high-level departments, such as the ministry in this case, may have to sit in court as the accused. In this respect, the farmers' attack on the ministry's administrative inaction promotes government by law.

The farmers' victory is just a start. But only when such cases are not news can we say that the rule of law has been achieved.

www.xinhuanet.com: The farmers' victory in this case deserves applause. But there are also things to worry about.

The case deserves applause because it shows us that government officials and ordinary people are equal in front of the law. And the case shows that ordinary citizens' legal knowledge has been enhanced. It is expected that more and more people will use the law to protect their interests and rights in future.

But the case also shows that some government departments are still ignoring ordinary people's legitimate rights. In this case, the farmers' land was to be used for house building, but was taken as "land for industry and mining." The land was simply requisitioned for commercial development by the local authorities. This greatly harms farmers' interests.

The farmers' victory is only over the accusation of the ministry's administrative inaction. If the farmers had accused the local government of illegal land requisition at a local court, would they have won in the case? This is questionable.