[Case Summary]This case involves an administrative lawsuit for the forced removal of attachments on land. The plaintiff, Li Zhiqiang, is a villager of Shuguang Village in Daxing District of Beijing City. Since the 1990s, he has legally obtained a self-retained land of 1 mu in the north of the village and has been planting more than 100 peach trees and other trees there for a long time. In November 2024, the town government, on the grounds that the satellite image plot belongs to "basic farmland", forcibly removed the trees without giving prior notice, serving legal documents, hearing the defendant's defense, or negotiating compensation. Li Zhiqiang entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for him.Zhi Chao LiThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit, and the court confirmed that Qiangqing's actions were illegal. The core disputes are the legitimacy of the plaintiff's rights and the legality of the defendant's procedures. Applicable laws: Articles 35 and 36 of the Administrative Enforcement Law; Articles 34 and 74 of the Administrative Litigation Law.

I. Review of the Case Facts

"What should I do if the trees I've planted for decades are forcibly cleared?" "Is it illegal for the town government to forcibly clear the land without giving Chen Shuang the opportunity to state her defense?" "Can I protect my rights if the trees planted on basic farmland are cleared?" These are the most worrying issues for farmers. Since the 1990s, plaintiff Li Zhiqiang has, through the unified arrangement of the village collective, legally obtained a self-owned plot of land of 1 mu located in the north of the village and has been planting more than 100 peach trees and other trees there for a long time. In November 2024, the town government, citing that the satellite image showed the plot of land was "basic farmland", determined that the plaintiff's tree planting violated the arable land protection policy. Without giving advance notice, sending written documents, hearing the plaintiff's defense, or negotiating compensation, the town government directly organized personnel to forcibly clear the trees involved, destroying years of business achievements. Li Zhiqiang entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for him.Zhai Chao LiThe lawyer filed an administrative lawsuit.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Whether the plaintiff, Li Zhiqiang's legitimate rights and interests should be protected.That is, whether they have been using the land and all structures on it legally for a long time.
  • Focus 2: Is the town government's forced eviction procedure legal?Did the court fulfill the statutory procedures such as issuing a reminder and hearing the defendant's statement and defense, and were the evidence presented and cross-examined during the trial?

III. Professional intervention by Hengluo Law Firm

The original complaint stated that:Li Zhiqiang requests to confirm that the town government's act of forcibly removing the attached objects on the ground on November 26, 2024 is illegal, and orders the defendant to bear all litigation costs.

The defendant (the town government) argued that:It cites the Regulations on the Protection of Basic Farmland and the regulations of Beijing Municipality to emphasize the duty of protection; points out that the Implementing Regulations of the Land Management Law and the Regulations on the Protection of Basic Farmland prohibit the development of forestry and fruit farming in basic farmland, and the clearance is to correct illegal activities; argues that the plaintiff does not have a contract or ownership certificate, and the clearance does not infringe their rights and interests.

Hengluo Lawyer's Agency Opinion:Zhi Chao LiThe lawyer established the argument that "first, the plaintiff's rights should be protected, and then the defendant's procedural violations should be challenged": focusing on procedural violations, according to Articles 35 and 36 of the Administrative Enforcement Law, it is necessary to issue a notice and hear the defendant's statements and defenses before forced demolition. However, the town government failed to provide evidence of having fulfilled these procedures, which constitutes a serious procedural violation; questioning the authenticity and relevance of the evidence: the land parcel clues lack original carriers, the planning schematic diagram lacks the production unit and time information, and the cooperative's "Situation Statement" is a unilateral testimony without the legal person appearing in court; highlighting the long-term factual use status: submitting villagers' testimonies and call recordings to prove that the plaintiff has continuously used and planted the land since the 1990s, and the village collective has not raised objections for a long time, which corroborates the ownership of the land; citing Article 34 of the Administrative Litigation Law to reverse the burden of proof: the town government failed to provide evidence of procedural compliance and should bear the consequences of losing the case.

IV. Outcome of the case

The People's Court of Daxing District adopted the proposal.Zhai Chao LiAccording to the lawyer's opinion, pursuant to Article 34 of the Administrative Litigation Law, the defendant bears the burden of proof regarding the legality of the administrative act, and failure to provide or late provision of evidence shall be deemed as lacking corresponding evidence; pursuant to Articles 35 and 36 of the Administrative Enforcement Law, prior to enforcement, the defendant must issue a reminder and guarantee the right to make statements and defenses. The defendant failed to issue a reminder or follow the legal procedures before implementing the enforcement, violating legal provisions and being deemed illegal. Therefore, the plaintiff's request to confirm the illegality of the enforcement action has factual and legal basis, and the court should rule that the defendant, the People's Government of XXX Town, Daxing District, Beijing City, illegally implemented the forced removal of trees on the land located in the north of Shuguang Village owned by the plaintiff, Li Zhiqiang, on November 26, 2024.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

The administrative organs must abide by the bottom line of "procedural justice" when administering according to law. In this case,Zhai Chao LiAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101202311629788, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ): Reminder: When citizens' rights and interests are infringed, they should promptly entrust professional lawyers to safeguard their rights by using legal means. In administrative litigation, the defendant bears the burden of proof for the legality of the administrative act. If the defendant cannot prove that the procedure is in accordance with the law, he/she will bear the consequences of losing the case. This provides a strong legal basis for confirming the illegality of Qiangqing and laying the foundation for subsequent rights protection.

VI. Common Questions and Answers for Special Service Cases

  1. Q: What should I do if the trees I've planted for decades are forcibly uprooted?
    A: Immediately fix the on-site images of the strong demolition, the alarm records, and the testimonies of the villagers who have used the land for a long time. Entrust a lawyer to initiate an administrative lawsuit to confirm the illegality.
  2. Q: Is it illegal for the town government to forcibly clear the land without giving Chen Sheng an opportunity to state his case and defend himself?
    A: It's illegal. According to Articles 35 and 36 of the Administrative Enforcement Law, before enforcement, the authorities must issue a notice and guarantee the right to make statements and defenses. If these procedures are not followed, the enforcement process is illegal.
  3. Q: Can I protect my rights if the trees planted on basic farmland are removed?
    A: Yes. Even if planting trees involves violations of regulations, Qiangqing still needs to follow legal procedures. If the procedures are illegal, they can sue to confirm the illegality and claim compensation.
  4. Q: How can I prove that the tree belongs to me without a contract?
    A: Submit factual evidence such as photos and videos of long-term farming, testimonies from fellow villagers, and call recordings to prove continuous use and actual ownership.
  5. Q: Who bears the burden of proof in administrative litigation?
    A: The defendant administrative organ shall bear the burden of proof regarding the legality of the administrative act, and failure to provide or providing evidence beyond the time limit shall be deemed as the absence of corresponding evidence.