DistantNews
Support us
๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ Taiwan /Elections & Politics

Descendants Denied Constitutional Review Over Stolen Land Compensation

From Liberty Times · () Chinese

Translated from Chinese, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Sources not specified Outcome reported
  • Descendants of former Grand Justice Wang Tse-chien's uncle are seeking constitutional review after a court awarded them 52.17 million NT dollars in state compensation for stolen land.
  • They argue the compensation is far below the land's market value, especially since part of it was designated for public road use.
  • The Constitutional Court's second review panel ruled their petition inadmissible, finding the dispute centered on the court's valuation methods rather than a constitutional issue.

Descendants of the late Wang Chu-chi, uncle of former Grand Justice Wang Tse-chien, have been denied a constitutional review regarding state compensation for land that was illegally sold. The family had been awarded 52,179,535 NT dollars in state compensation after their land, located in a prime area of Taipei, was stolen following Wang Chu-chi's death in 1991.

The dispute arose when individuals forged documents to impersonate Wang Chu-chi's eldest son, falsely claiming he was the sole heir. This led to the fraudulent acquisition of new land ownership certificates and the subsequent sale of three plots to unsuspecting buyers. These buyers later donated the land to the government for tax deductions, a process that involved the Taipei City Land Administration.

The family initiated legal action seeking state compensation, arguing that government oversight failures contributed to the theft of their land and prevented them from seeking recourse from the unknowing buyers. However, they contended that the awarded compensation significantly undervalued the property, particularly considering a portion had been designated for public road use.

Wang Tse-yung, one of the descendants, filed a constitutional interpretation request, asserting that the court's reliance on a property appraisal report, which disregarded the land's public utility designation, violated the constitutional right to property. The Constitutional Court's second review panel, however, ruled the petition inadmissible. They determined that the core of the dispute lay in the lower courts' interpretation and application of the law concerning property valuation, rather than a fundamental constitutional question, thus declining to hear the case.

Even for the sake of public interest, one must not disregard the property rights protected by the constitution, and require individuals to sacrifice their personal property to complete public undertakings.

โ€” Wang Tse-yungWang Tse-yung's argument in his constitutional interpretation request, asserting that the compensation violated property rights.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by Liberty Times in Chinese. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.