Criminal Law Responses To Forced Demolitions
1. Legal Framework
Forced demolitions in China have been a significant source of conflict, especially amid urban redevelopment. Criminal law can intervene when:
Violence or coercion is used against residents:
Article 234 of the Criminal Law (intentional injury) may apply if demolition officials or contractors physically harm occupants.
Fraud or abuse of power by officials:
Article 397 (abuse of power by state functionaries) or Article 392 (embezzlement, misappropriation) if compensation is diverted or false promises are made.
Obstruction of justice or extortion:
Article 274 (extortion) may apply when occupants are forced to vacate under threat.
Trespass or illegal detention:
Articles 238-239 cover illegal confinement if occupants are detained during demolition.
Chinese courts have prosecuted both government officials and contractors when demolitions involved illegal coercion, excessive violence, or fraudulent compensation schemes.
2. Case Studies
Case A: Guangzhou Forced Demolition (2012)
Facts:
Residents in a Guangzhou neighborhood refused to vacate for redevelopment.
Demolition personnel, including private security contractors, used violence—pushing residents, breaking doors, and damaging property.
Legal Issues:
Intentional injury (Article 234).
Coercion and intimidation by private contractors.
Outcome:
The contractor’s supervisor was sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment for intentional injury.
Compensation disputes between the developer and the residents were later settled in civil court.
Significance:
Established accountability for private actors involved in forced demolitions.
Clarified that physical harm to residents constitutes criminal liability, even in the context of urban redevelopment.
Case B: Chongqing Forced Demolition with Bribery (2015)
Facts:
Local officials approved a demolition project, promising residents compensation far below market value.
Officials accepted bribes from the contractor in exchange for coercing residents to vacate quickly.
Legal Issues:
Abuse of power by state functionaries (Article 397).
Bribery and extortion (Articles 385-386).
Outcome:
Two local officials were sentenced to 5 and 6 years in prison.
The contractor involved received a 4-year sentence for bribery and coercion.
Significance:
Demonstrates that criminal law targets both public officials and private actors in corrupt forced demolitions.
Case C: Beijing Forced Demolition Leading to Death (2016)
Facts:
In Beijing, a resident resisting eviction during a redevelopment project was fatally injured after security personnel forcibly entered the home.
Legal Issues:
Negligent homicide (Article 233) or intentional injury causing death (Article 234).
Illegal detention and coercion during forced eviction.
Outcome:
Security personnel received 6-8 years imprisonment.
Developer faced civil liability for wrongful death.
Significance:
Showed that criminal liability applies even if the demolition is “state-backed” when human life is endangered.
Case D: Hangzhou Demolition Fraud Case (2014)
Facts:
Developers falsified compensation agreements to residents, claiming they had accepted payment while keeping actual compensation.
Residents filed complaints after being forcibly evicted.
Legal Issues:
Fraud (Article 266).
Abuse of power and dereliction by local officials.
Outcome:
Developer and two officials convicted of fraud; prison terms ranged from 3-5 years.
Full restitution was ordered to residents.
Significance:
Criminal law protects property owners from fraudulent schemes in forced demolitions.
Abuse of trust and falsifying agreements triggers prosecution.
Case E: Wuhan Forced Demolition and Illegal Detention (2013)
Facts:
Residents were detained in a warehouse for refusing to vacate during redevelopment.
Contractors and local security personnel forcibly removed them and threatened harm.
Legal Issues:
Illegal detention (Article 238).
Coercion and intimidation.
Outcome:
Two security managers sentenced to 4 and 5 years imprisonment.
Local government officials were reprimanded, but not criminally charged.
Significance:
Reiterates that criminal liability applies to private agents even under official redevelopment mandates.
Illegal detention is actionable under criminal law.
Case F: Nanjing Large-Scale Forced Eviction (2017)
Facts:
A redevelopment company demolished a residential complex overnight.
Residents were given minimal notice and forcibly removed; some suffered injuries.
Legal Issues:
Intentional injury.
Violation of property rights and coercion.
Outcome:
Three company managers convicted of intentional injury; prison terms 2-5 years.
Civil claims for damages were awarded to residents.
Significance:
Highlights ongoing criminal enforcement against companies using violent or illegal measures.
3. Key Takeaways
Criminal liability arises when force or deception is used in evicting residents.
Both government officials and private actors can be prosecuted.
Charges include intentional injury, negligent homicide, fraud, bribery, and illegal detention.
Sentences vary by severity, from fines and short prison terms to long-term imprisonment for death or severe injury.
Civil remedies often complement criminal penalties, including restitution and compensation to residents.
Enforcement emphasizes protecting residents’ safety and property rights, balancing development with legality.
RELATED Blog
comments