Event Reports
In the first section the differences of the legal status of agricultural enterprises in Germany and China were discussed. LI Yougen, professor at the law school of Nanjing University, pointed out that a policy heavily influenced by the current government is still more important than the actual legal system. This worked well in past times, but due to an increasingly complex reality the legislation has to be more practically oriented. Market forces have to play a key role.
The mediator and lawyer Christiane Graß underlined the protective function of the German Civil Law, which prevents the splitting of agricultural holdings in case of succession. Also in the case of transferring wealth to descendants during someone's lifetime, there are many possibilities to ensure the continued existence of the agricultural holding.
Prof. ZHANG Hongxiao of the Agricultural University Nanjing analyzed the legal status of agricultural cooperatives in China. When they are registered as organizational units, agricultural cooperatives can function as legal entities. But this system is not working for all collectives within China which call themselves to be collective cooperatives (nongye hezuoshe). In some Chinese provinces there is already a stable legal framework, but due to practical problems for agricultural enterprises, e.g. those in underdeveloped rural areas, autonomy rights have to be preserved. From the legal comparison with the German law system the speaker expects China to learn a lot.
Dr. Christian Busse from the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture displayed the declining commercial power of single cultivators by introducing the German dairy sector. As a reaction, agricultural enterprises would establish capital companies or cooperative associations to compensate the decreasing influence. In Europe the agricultural producer organization has been existing since 2008/2009 while Germany has seen forms of cooperatives even since the 1960s. As a consequence this would arise special rights and obligations. When a cooperative is founded it has to be ensured that monopoly positions are prevented.
The land use rights were topic of the second panel. In China there is a controversial discussion about the ownership of property and the buildings situated on it. Prof. JIN Jian, lawyer at Nanjing University, pointed out that the property always belongs to the collective and single farmers haven’t got the absolute ownership, but rather a right of use for the land. Until now, it is not regulated if the right of use is transferable to other persons or not. There is a high demand for property on the countryside by urban residents, which is very welcomed by the local rural population, but the selling of usage rights is illegal. At the moment there is a lack of legal standards to rely on.
The need for more social action can be seen by the example of the so called “left alone children”, who are children of migrant workers left behind in their rural hometowns. A close connection between the society, the government and affected families would be necessary to ensure the well-being of these children. Due to their life circumstances the parents are often unable to assume their responsibilities.
The current status of lease rights, which was discussed in the third panel, showed the necessity to guarantee the rural development. The increasing migration from the land to the cities would hamper the rural development.
From a German perspective, Professor José Martinez emphasized the public interest for property used by agricultural enterprises. The government takes over regulatory functions to prevent that rural property would solely be subject to market forces.
The fourth panel discussed the problematic nature of a insufficient systematically structured agricultural law in China, especially in regard to environmental protection. It was concluded that public participation should be considered as more essential and a transparent process of decision making has to be established. Furthermore planning regulations have to be strictly implemented and monitored by the responsible authorities.
A pilot project was established in Kunshan, Jiangsu province, where the supervisory function is taken over by the public prosecutor's office. The office has the power to take legal action on behalf of the public interest and is the main actor in the civil law right of action. But it is still questionable if by this means the function of non-governmental actors like NGOs would be undermined. A mixture of both, executive as well as the judiciary functions would be the consequence.
In a fifth panel the content-related design of seed law was discussed. The academic discourse would especially discuss whether the legislation should protect the seeds by legal regulations of the variety protection or by patent law. The new regulations are still vague, what means that there is a need to improve the legal framework and security control. Prof. Martinez pointed out that next to the ethical question whether living beings can be patentable, there is a fundamental decision for variety protection or patent law which is going to be highly determining agricultural performance. Variety protection would contribute to competitive research work as it supports major public interests.
The final panel dealt with questions related to the field of food safety. Ms. YONG Dongxia from the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture underlined that a stricter law dealing with quality reliability came into force in 2015. Thilo Ortgies research assistant at the agricultural department of Göttingen University pointed out that it is one of the tasks of food law to ensure both, the interests of the food industry as well as that of the consumers. Cross-border cooperation would therefore be essential.
The last contribution to the symposium was by Dr. Leticia Bourges, Secretary-General of the European Council of Rural Law, who stressed the importance of Circular Economy. The law has to reflect the close connections between food, waste and recycling. Incentives like reduced taxation would help to reward positive consumer behavior and as a consequence encourage responsible behavior within a society.
The symposium provided a platform for a lively exchange of law experts, representatives from public authorities and legal practitioners. At the end, similarities as well as differences in the agricultural law of Germany and China became clearly visible. The aim for both countries is to maintain successful agricultural enterprises and ensure an appropriate agricultural law. Furthermore environmental protection is an important task for the agriculture. Within the definition and the content-related design of the right of use there are substantial differences in the jurisdiction. It was concluded that it needs a comprehensive agricultural law.
The symposium was part of a multi-annual cooperation of Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation and the German-Sino Institute of Legal Studies in Nanjing on reforms of China's economic system.