农地产权“有意的制度模糊说”质疑

Query on the “Intentional Institutional Ambiguity” of China's Agricultural Land Tenure

研究目的:与"有意的制度模糊"学说商榷,籍以深化对中国农地产权制度的认识。研究方法:文献研究、法律文本分析。研究结果:(1)该学说认为中国农地产权制度没有任何歧义,这与集体化以来农地所有权属高度分化成为地方性知识并具有多种含义和所指的事实不相符;(2)该学说认为中央有意不在立法上明确界定农地的所有权归属,这与相关法律一直采用概括加列举式的立法技术试图明晰它的立法史实相违背;(3)该学说认为"有意的制度模糊"是中国农村改革成功的关键,且能有效化解土地纠纷,这些也与中国农村改革史和土地纠纷的发生机理相冲突。研究结论:"有意的制度模糊"学说不能成立,不可轻率使用"模糊"之类的词语来概括中国农地产权制度的缺陷。

The purpose of this paper is to query the theory of ＂intentional institutional ambiguity＂ and to deepen the understanding of Agricultural Land Tenure. Methods used include literature and legal text analysis. The results are as follows. Firstly, the theory of ＂intentional institutional ambiguity＂ considers the rural land property as a universal knowledge with certain meaning of ownership. In fact, it is a local knowledge with various property subjects. Secondly, this doctrine misunderstands the original intention of the central legislature, which wants to define the land property subject by general-list-style combination of legislation instead of deliberately obscuring it. Thirdly, in its opinion, the property rights ambiguity is the reason for the success of rural reform, and can resolve land disputes. These viewpoints are wrong too because that the former is in conflict with the historical facts, and the latter does not find the key factor of land disputes. In conclusion, the theory of intentionally blurred is false, the word as ＂ambiguous land property＂ must be treated carefully in describing the imperfection of the agricultural Land tenure.