Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)aaapublished in(发表于) 2013/12/16 0:34:50 Developers were determined by the Government and private museums in Shanghai demolition case background
On December 11, 2013, Shanghai changning district people's Court of administrative litigation, 1th this year, after twists and turns and finally at the end of the trial.
It originates from "private museum" by case stemming from the forced demolition, was seen by some media as "history's most expensive to demolish" case title-the plaintiff Liu Guangjia, Zhu Rong Zhou and his wife has filed 20 lawsuits to the Minhang district of Shanghai people's requests and amounted to about $ 290 million worth of applications for State compensation.
This trial, the main is to review the legality of the Minhang district people's Governments forced demolition of the accused, but the acts, forced demolition developer behind the background, deserves more attention.
Was removed and the private museum
Located in the West suburb of Shanghai Minhang district, rock and bonsai Museum next to the road, is to demolish on April 27, 2012.
Museum owner Liu Guangjia recalls that shortly after 6 o'clock, several strangers come to the Museum.
This is a quite famous in Shanghai private rock and bonsai Museum. According to Liu Jia Readme, the early 90, Liu Guangjia toured the famous flower village, shexian, Anhui buy Bonsai more than 1000 employees. Since then, Liu Guangjia visiting lingbi, hotan, Xinjiang, Qinghai, Anhui Province three rivers gather the strange stones, such as jade, after more than 20 years, the Museum is finally taking shape.
Museum contract Liu Guangjia as the principal in the early 90 's fish pond, old ponds built up 81 cobbled stone bridge, breakdown on the bridge of bonsai, under the bridge, then wanders Japan Koi. In 2006, Liu Guangjia decided to open the Museum, welcomes visitors free admission.
On April 27 to a stranger entered the yard, set up more than 70 year old Liu Guangjia, then plug it into the backseat of a van outside the Museum. Subsequently, nannies and gardeners are also brought under control, Liu Guangjia wife heard noises outside, wear Pajamas out to see it, and being, with a quilt wrapped up the van.
But organization implementation of the demolition of the Minhang District Government are quite different. Attorney Zhang Pengfeng road, Minhang district, the Government says, the day that the Government is trying to convince the parties to leave, it was after the fight, accompanied by medical personnel, placing two old men to the hotel, and later brought to houses. Minhang District Government did not provide law enforcement video.
"Go to work, they won't be taken away from, so there is no video. "Zhang Pengfeng said.
About 10 o'clock, Liu Wenhao, son of Liu Guangjia being Wusong estuary with the family received a call from neighbors, telling him "House has been removed". Liu Wenhao is for parents to call, but no one answered.
One witness told China Youth daily reporter for the day, outside the Museum on the same day cordon, dozens of cars outside the Museum materials handling, and three excavators to demolish directly into the Museum.
About 16 o'clock on that day, Liu Wenhao back to Minhang district. On his way in at the local police station, the car stopped by the father poured blood Museum--there have been in ruins, some scavengers are wandering on the ruins, hope to pick up some valuable stuff.
Station No museums have been demolished and Liu Guangjia couple missing any records, just told Liu Wenhao, if 24 hours haven't found who then made a report to.
The next morning, Liu Wenhao received the father's phone call from a cell phone, an unfamiliar voice told him that parents were Jinping road, in the community room.
The day after seeing Liu Wenhao, Liu Guangjia riches, saying only that the sentence "go home", but Liu Guangjia didn't know their "home" and a Museum, is dead.
Before the demolitions had just signed an agreement?
In fact, demolition of the shadows began to appear as early as 2003.
Liu Guangjia dismantlement and removal of the encounter is divided into two blocks of land, including fish ponds at the homestead and contract Liu Guangjia have land. The Homestead area of 582 square there are 4 total of 407 square area between legal buildings. Fish pond area is debatable, said Liu Guangjia after measuring 4,800 sqm, the Government thinks about 2000 square meters with an overhead imagery of photos.
In 2003, the company called Shanghai Xiao Yu real estate development company limited (hereinafter referred to as "Xiao Yu") low key enterprises in order to get a price of 44 million Yuan including Liu Guangjia scope Homestead and land contracting 70,934 square metres of land. Public information display, Xiao Yu real estate company actually paid in that year the land sold for 13.5 million dollars.
By 2006, only Liu Guangjia left this land home you do not want to move. Liu Wenhao says not to move the main reason is a museum with a lot of field grown bonsai, relocation of excessive loss of father hopes that the Government will be protected.
In 2007, the new community has been built on this land, "Chang Xin Yuan". Since then, both sides held numerous consultations, still have not reached an agreement on the relocation.
September 7, 2009, Xiao Yu companies to Minhang district, housing and the Housing Authority deferred ruling on applications, applications make Liu Guangjia family moved from their house in the 15th. On September 30, the Minhang district Bureau of its award decision No. 287, Xiao Yu removed Liu Guangjia various compensation payments to the company should more than 1.76 million Yuan and flower stones within the professional scope Homestead relocation costs for professional assessment and compensation, while Liu Guangjia should "move away from the original site."
No. 287 of the award does not clearly identifying a particular "moved from their original site," whether or not to include the site of contract Liu Guangjia ponds on the land portion, which become the focus of both sides disputed in court. Liu Wenhao memories, this does not appear to be a problem at that time, the two sides talked about is the housing units on land.
Although Xiao Yu companies to apply for support, but the relocation did not arrive. But by November 2011, a month after the new Communist Party of the town Office, housing authority formally to the Minhang district people's court filing, seeking to enforce. Court ruling agreed that the sixth item No. 287, ruled the award that "date of receiving this award on the respondent moved from their original site in the 15th. ”
Since then, the developers, the Court continues to press. Memories, according to Liu, Xiao-Yu Yang Delong company agents communicate with Liu for 3 weeks prior to the demolition, removal compensation costs have reached 80 million Yuan relocation intentions, Yang Delong as regulating people requested $ 2 million worth of commissions. Liu said that the compensation is reached within the recommended range of the Minhang District Court at the time.
On April 26, the demolition occurred a day after Yang Delong and Liu signed the Commission's undertaking, Liu finds that only need to wait for the final official agreement, however demolition ensued.
Lawyer Zhang Pengfeng do not agree with Mr LAU's argument, he said, Yang Delong is not representative of Sao feng and Liu Yu company authority to sign the agreement, Yang just for their own interests to mediate "if signed, Governments are reluctant to see a negotiated settlement rather than going to demolish it? ”
However, if in accordance with the agreement, developers need to pay relocation costs of 80 million Yuan, with developers giving millions of dollars of previously estimated, the cost gap between the two options is considerable.
Businessmen from the developer backgrounds
Xiao Yu company was founded on June 24, 2002 the only project on the land is located in liujia "Chang Xin Yuan".
Xiao Yu company is invited to take the land. Transferring this land is particularly easy for real estate development-only 6 families-the land, the rest are farmlands, removal is very convenient.
Company statistics show that Shanghai Xiao Yu real estate ownership structure have had many mutations. In 2002 when it was established, registered capital of 8 million Yuan, the legal representative Wang Aizhong and Zhang Fengfei. In 2004, Xiao Yu expanded into 20 million yuan of registered capital of the company, and a 23 years old young man named Wang Hao has 20% shares of the company.
Census shows that when Wang Hao was actually son of Minhang district Vice Governor Wang Shengyang.
Xiao Yu company shares through change, in September 2007, Wang Hao out Xiao Yu company, a lady named Xu Jinfeng arrived at Xiao Yu on the list of the shareholders of the company, received 20% shares of the company. In fact, Xu Jinfeng is the mother of Wang Hao, also has become the Minhang district people's Congress Deputy Director Wang Shengyang's wife.
In January 2008, Xiao Yu company ownership changes again, Xu Jinfeng withdrew 20% shares, but still held positions in the company. Shareholder is then turned back into the original Wang Aizhong and Huang again.
In fact, Liu Guangjia after Xiao Yu had been repeatedly reflected the company's merchant background, and follow that road, Minhang district, the Government should not interfere with Sao Feng Yu company relocation disputes with him.
Document removal risk assessment in the relocation, "according to Liu Guangjia have repeatedly reflected in writing to zhuanqiao town, Minhang district, municipal people's Government and municipal people's Government demolition is a combination between illegal companies, demolition of illegal, declined to move."
Forced demolitions occurred, comb through, business information, Hu jiong Ming Liu Wenhao and lawyers who have been discovered with Xiao Yu company, Cheong Hing Garden associated company interest, removing Wang Hao and Xu Jinfeng, but the company also has two close relatives of officials, and involved the demolition one depth.
The end of November, Liu Wenhao was through Twitter to disclose the matter to April 2013, respond to the Shanghai Municipal Commission for discipline inspection, called "after January 2008, Xu and his full exit from the company itself, for offending to fund actions provided a corrected version. Investigations found no Wang Shengyang Office to facilitate, for the benefit of the company. "Whereas the other associated companies involved are" the absence of actual business activities. ”
Sue courts, or sue the Government?
Demolition process, who demolished the House, however, is the Government, courts and real estate companies? For a long time, Liu Jia failed to understand this most basic conditions.
Liu Wenhao initially selected an online petition. On May 8, 2012, Liu Wenhao through the online petition Center reflect themselves in Shanghai was about the forced demolition. Responses received on June 27, said: "you belong to justice to demolish the home demolition, for any inconvenience caused, please forgive me. "The reply did not mention loss of property issues.
In the meantime, Liu Wenhao has found a law firm to investigate the forced demolition, lawyers studied the relevant legal instruments that, you should go to court, "is, after all, forced demolition of the judiciary".
On June 10, 2012, Liu Wenhao make $ 120 million worth of State compensation to the Minhang district people's Court. Upon receipt of this claim form, Minhang District Court had not required 7 days pay and even written reply within, all the sounds.
Involvement of public opinion the situation has changed. On June 28, has disclosed during the demolition of the media event. Shortly thereafter, the Minhang District Court lawyer went to court. According to lawyer talk transcripts case Court of Minhang District Court judge emphasized that the Court's preliminary view was that the decision is documented in the scope Homestead Housing Authority, the judge considered that they should sue the Government, "finally can push in various sectors to the Court".
In early July, one cadre took the day of demolition of the Court gave Liu the enforcement of archives law, where it enforces file, in a closing phrase stated in the notes on the demolition site of the Minhang district Bureau of relocation is in "the unified arrangements of the Minhang District Government agencies" under.
Thanks to the support of relocation within the document, on August 28, 2012, Liu Wenhao to the Minhang district people's request for State compensation, and be entertained.
But then it stalled again. The end of September, reporters wrote to the then Shanghai leader reflected it, causing leadership it deserves. Thing appears to be easing, first the lawyer Zhang Pengfeng road, Minhang district, met with Liu Wenhao, on October 19, in the face of demolition and half a year later, Xiao Yu first sent a notice, requesting client's belongings.
However, Zhang Pengfeng denied that the case relating to the processing instructions of the leadership, he said, themselves in August have taken over this matter, everything is dealt with under the normal procedure.
As a rule, the Government should be made within two months of receipt of the application if compensation decisions, on October 25, 2012, at a time when time is running out, decisions to deny compensation to the Minhang District Government.
That no compensation decisions mingaoguan based on the book, about a month later, on November 20, 2012, Hu jiong Ming commissioned a lawyer for the plaintiff to the Shanghai Municipal Intermediate People's Court to administrative compensation proceedings, raised more than 200 million Yuan for compensation.
And many of the cases of demolition, were stuck in the case of proceedings in the case, after 7 days, the Court is still no answer. At this time, Liu Wenhao was issued through Microblogs to Xiao Yu company "five golden flowers" about the corruption, followed by a number of media in reporting, and further increased awareness of the case.
January 25, 2013, Shanghai intermediate people's Court urged Hu jiong Ming lawyer, grant case, speed and asked the lawyer told his client. On February 6, the Shanghai intermediate people's Court ruling specifying changning district people's court case, case number (2013) Hu early long line (pay) character, the 1th.
"I want to put your case into a relocation compensation cases. "Liu Wenhao says," I'm not going to reconciliation, I would like to win. ”
(Original title: private museums in Shanghai behind cases of forced demolition)
2013年12月11日，上海市长宁区人民法院今年的1号行政诉讼案，历经波折终于在年底开庭。
这起源于“私人博物馆”遭强拆而起的案件，被一些媒体冠以“史上最贵强拆案”头衔——原告刘光嘉、朱荣周夫妇共向上海市闵行区人民政府提起了二十项诉讼请求及共计约2.9亿元的国家赔偿申请。
这次庭审，主要是审查被告闵行区人民政府组织强拆的行为是否合法，但这项行为之外，强拆背后的开发商背景，更值得关注。
被拆掉的私人博物馆
位于上海西南郊闵行区剑川路旁的奇石盆景博物馆，是在2012年4月27日被强拆的。
据博物馆的主人刘光嘉回忆，当天约6时，几名陌生人来到博物馆。
这是一家在上海颇有声名的私人奇石盆景博物馆。据刘家自述，上世纪90年代初，刘光嘉曾赴著名的安徽歙县卖花渔村收购盆景1000余盆。此后，刘光嘉又先后前往安徽灵璧、新疆和田、青海三江源等地采集奇石美玉，历经二十余年，博物馆终于初具规模。
博物馆的主体位于刘光嘉上世纪90年代初承包的鱼塘之上，老人在鱼塘之上架起了81座铺满鹅卵石的石桥，桥上分列了各种盆景，桥下则游荡着日本锦鲤。2006年，刘光嘉决定对外开放博物馆，欢迎游人免费参观。
4月27日来的陌生人一进院子，就架起了70多岁的刘光嘉，随即将其塞进了馆外一辆面包车的后座。随后，家里的保姆和花匠也被控制，刘光嘉的老伴听到外面有声响，穿着睡衣出去查看情况，也被人架住，用被子裹住带上了面包车。
不过组织实施这次拆迁的闵行区政府的说法则与此大相径庭。闵行区政府代理律师张鹏峰表示，当天政府是先试图说服当事人离开，遭到反抗之后由医务人员陪同，将两位老人先安置到了宾馆，后带到安置房。但闵行区政府并未提供执法录像。
“一去就做工作，对方反抗就带离了，所以没有录像。”张鹏峰说。
当天10时左右，正在吴淞口陪家人的刘光嘉之子刘文浩接到了邻居的电话，告诉他“家被拆了”。刘文浩随即给父母拨去电话，但没有人接听。
一位当天的目击者告诉中国青年报记者，当天博物馆外被拉上了警戒线，几十辆车在博物馆外进行物品的搬运，而三辆挖掘机则直接开进了博物馆进行强拆。
当天16时许，刘文浩赶回闵行区。在赶去派出所报案的路上，车子路过父亲倾注了心血的博物馆——那儿已经成为一片废墟，若干拾荒者正在遗迹上游荡，希望拣一些值钱的玩意儿。
派出所没有就博物馆被拆和刘光嘉夫妇失踪作出任何记录，只告诉刘文浩，假如24小时还没找到人，再来报案。
第二天早上，刘文浩接到了父亲手机打来的电话，一个陌生的声音告诉他，父母正在金平路某小区的房间中。
那天，见到刘文浩后，刘光嘉眼睛有些湿润，只说了一句“回家”，但刘光嘉还不知道，自己的“家”和博物馆，都已经没了。
强拆前刚刚签订协议？
实际上，拆迁的阴影早在2003就开始出现。
刘光嘉这次遭遇拆迁的土地分为两块，包括刘光嘉所拥有的宅基地和承包的鱼塘土地。宅基地的面积为582平方米，上面有4间共计407平方米面积的合法建筑。鱼塘的面积则存在争议，刘光嘉家表示经过测量为4800平方米，政府方面凭借一张俯拍的照片认为约2000平方米。
2003年，一家名为上海啸宇房地产开发有限公司（以下简称“啸宇公司”）的低调企业，以4400万元的价格拿到了包括刘光嘉家宅基地和承包土地所在范围的70934平方米土地。公开资料显示，啸宇房地产公司当年实际缴纳的土地出让金为1350万元。
到2006年，这块土地上只剩下刘光嘉家一户人家不愿搬迁。刘文浩表示，不搬的最主要原因就是博物馆内有很多地栽盆景，搬迁的损耗过大，父亲希望政府能予以保护。
2007年，这块土地上已经建起了新小区“畅馨园”。此后，双方多次协商，仍然没有能就搬迁一事达成协议。
2009年9月7日，啸宇公司向闵行区住房保障和房屋管理局递上了裁决申请书，申请让刘光嘉一家在15日内搬离宅基地。9月30日，闵行区房管局287号裁决书裁定，啸宇公司应该支付拆刘光嘉各种补偿款项176万余元，并找专业机构对宅基地范围内的花卉奇石的搬迁费用进行专业评估和补偿，而刘光嘉则应该“搬离原址”。
287号裁决书并没有特别明确的点明“搬离原址”的原址是否包括刘光嘉承包土地上的鱼塘部分，这也成为双方如今在法庭上争议的焦点所在。刘文浩回忆，当时这似乎并没有成为问题，双方谈的就是宅基地上的房屋拆迁。
虽然啸宇公司的申请得到了支持，然而拆迁并未到来。但到2011年11月，新的镇党委书记履新一个月后，房管局正式向闵行区人民法院提交申请，要求强制执行。法院的裁定书同意了287号裁决书裁定内容的第六项，即“被申请人在接到本裁定书之日起15日内搬离原址。”
此后，开发商、法院都不断来人催促。据刘家回忆，啸宇公司的代理人杨德龙在拆迁前与刘家沟通了3个星期，双方达成了8000万元搬迁补偿费用的搬迁意向，而杨德龙作为调节人则要求得到200万元的佣金。刘家表示，这个补偿费用是在当时闵行区法院的建议范围内达成的。
4月26日，拆迁发生的前一天，杨德龙与刘家签订了佣金承诺书，刘家认为只需等待最后的正式协议，然而拆迁随即发生。
律师张鹏峰并不认同刘家的说法，他表示，杨德龙并不具有代表啸宇公司与刘家签订协议的权力，杨只是为了自己的利益进行调解，“假如真的签了，政府难道不愿意看到协商解决而非要强拆吗？”
不过，假如按照协议来，开发商需要支付8000万元的搬迁费用，与此前开发商给出的几百万元的估计来看，两项选择之间成本差距相当大。
开发商的官商背景
成立于2002年6月24日的啸宇公司唯一做过的项目就是位于刘家土地上的“畅馨园”。
啸宇公司是以邀标的方式拿下的该块土地。出让的这块土地尤其便于房地产开发——该块土地仅有6户人家，其余部分均为农田，拆迁十分方便。
公司资料显示，上海啸宇房地产有限公司的股权结构曾经有过多次变动。2002年成立时，注册资本金为800万元，法人代表为王爱忠和张凤飞。2004年，啸宇公司的注册资本扩充为2000万元，而一位名为王昊的23岁年轻人占了公司20%的股份。
户籍资料显示，王昊实际上是时任闵行区政协副主席的王胜扬之子。
此后啸宇公司的股权又历经变迁，2007年9月，王昊退出啸宇公司，一位名为徐金凤的女士出现在啸宇公司的股东名单上，获得公司20%的股份。实际上，徐金凤正是王昊的母亲，也是当时已经成为闵行区人大常委会副主任王胜扬的妻子。
2008年1月，啸宇公司的股权再次变动，徐金凤退出了20%的股份，但仍然在公司担任职务。股东则再次变回了最初的王爱忠和黄建华。
实际上，刘光嘉此前就曾多次反映过啸宇公司的官商背景，并据此认为闵行区政府不应该介入啸宇公司与他的拆迁纠纷之中。
在拆迁内档中获得的拆迁风险评估也显示，“刘光嘉曾多次向颛桥镇人民政府及闵行区人民政府书面反映拆迁人是官商结合的非法公司，拆迁非法，拒绝协商搬迁”。
强拆发生后，通过梳理工商资料，刘文浩和律师胡炯明又发现了一家与啸宇公司和畅馨园项目发生利益关联的公司，除去王昊和徐金凤外，该公司还有两人为官员的近亲属，并且其中一人深度介入了此次拆迁。
11月底，刘文浩一度通过微博披露此事，到2013年4月，上海市纪委作出回应，称“2008年1月后，徐某某及其子自行从该公司完全退出，对违规投资入股的行为作了纠正。调查中，没有发现王胜扬利用职务便利，为该公司谋取利益的情况。”而另外涉及到的关联公司则“没有开展过实际经营活动。”
告法院，还是告政府？
拆迁突如起来，但谁拆的房子，是政府，法院还是房地产公司？很长一段时间，刘家都没能搞清楚这个最基本的情况。
刘文浩最初选择了网上信访。2012年5月8日，刘文浩通过上海的网上信访中心反映自己家遭到强拆一事。6月27日才收到的回复称：“您家拆迁属于司法强拆，对您造成的不便，敬请谅解。”回复并未提到遗失的财物问题。
其间，刘文浩先后找了一家律师事务所对强拆进行调查，律师们研究了相关的法律文书认为，应该先去找法院，“毕竟是司法强拆”。
2012年6月10日，刘文浩向闵行区人民法院提出1.2亿元的国家赔偿。收到这份赔偿申请书后，闵行法院并未在法定的7天时间内作出赔与不赔的书面答复，一切了无声息。
舆论的介入使得情势有所改变。6月28日，有媒体率先披露了这起拆迁事件。此后不久，闵行法院将刘家律师请去了法院。根据律师当时的谈话笔录，闵行法院立案庭的一位法官强调，法院的初步意见是，裁定是针对宅基地范围内有证的房屋，法官认为他们应该去告政府，“各个部门最后都可以推给法院”。
7月初，法院一位干部把拆迁当天的强制执行档案给了刘家律师，也就是这份强制执行档案中，一份落款闵行区房管局的《拆迁现场情况说明》写明，拆迁是在“闵行区政府相关部门的统一部署”下进行的。
由于有了拆迁内档的支持，在2012年8月28日，刘文浩向闵行区人民政府提出了国家赔偿的要求，并被受理。
然而之后一切再次停滞。9月底，有记者向时任上海市领导写信反映此事，引起领导的重视。事情似乎开始出现转机，先是闵行区的代理律师张鹏峰约见了刘文浩，10月19日，在遭遇拆迁半年之后，啸宇公司第一次发来通知，要求移交当事人的财物。
不过，张鹏峰否认此案的处理与领导的批示有关，他表示，自己8月就已经接手此事，一切都是按正常程序处理。
按照规定，政府应该在收到申请的两个月内作出是否赔偿的决定，2012年10月25日，在时间即将耗尽之时，闵行区政府作出了不予行政赔偿的决定。
这份不予赔偿决定书成为民告官的依据，大约一个月之后，2012年11月20日，原告委托胡炯明律师向上海市一中院正式提起行政赔偿诉讼，提出了2亿多元的赔偿申请。
和诸多拆迁案件一样，本案也一度卡在立案的程序之上，7天之后法院仍然杳无音讯。也是在此时，刘文浩通过微博发出了指向啸宇公司的“五朵金花”贪腐一事，随后多家媒体介入报道，而案件的关注度也进一步提高。
2013年1月25日，上海一中院致电胡炯明律师，准予立案，并要求律师速告知当事人。2月6日，上海一中院裁定指定长宁区人民法院审理此案，案号为（2013）沪长行初（赔）字第1号。
“我希望把自己的案子做成一个拆迁赔偿案例。”刘文浩说，“我不会和解，我要一个输赢。”
（原标题：上海一私人博物馆强拆案的背后）
赞