王者也

WANG Zheye

拆除重建类城市更新在我国法律上的启动前提是“公共利益”，但判断其是否符合公共利益并非易事。美国城市更新有悠久的历史，在实践中，立法机关将对“公共利益”的判断改为对被征收地区是否“衰败”的界定，司法机关则逐步降低司法审查的强度。凯洛案引发了对美国城市更新中滥用“衰败”界定的谴责，此后美国各州立法和司法机关对凯洛案作出了不同回应。我国土地制度和征收制度均不同于美国，但仍可从美国经验中获得启示。具体而言，在立法上对“公共利益”的界定应细分为“物理判断因素”和“经济判断因素”，并予以细化和明确；在司法上对“公共利益”的审查应从对“受让人”的审查入手，以鉴别是否属于“幌子征收”。

The legal premise of the demolition and reconstruction of urban renewal is the “public interest”, but it is not easy to judge whether it is in line with the “public interest”. Urban renewal in the United States has a long history. In practice, the legislature changed the judgment of “public interest” to the definition of whether the expropriated area is “blight”, while the judicial organs gradually reduced the intensity of judicial review. “Kelo v. City of New London” has sparked the abuse of “blight” in urban renewal of the United States, following different state legislative and judicial responses. China’s land system and expropriation system are different from the United States, but we can still be learned from the American experiences. Specifically, the legislative definition of the “public interest” should be subdivided into the “physical judgment factors” and “economic judgment factors”, and they should be refined and clear, and the judicial review of the “public interest” should start with a review of “transferee” to identify whether it belongs to the “pretextual takings”.

王者也，华东政法大学法律学院，行政法博士研究生；香港大学，访问学者。791232337@qq.com

• 收起