Taiwanese lawyer explains legal hurdles in reclaiming submerged land now state property

A piece of private land in Taipei, submerged by a river for decades before resurfacing, was registered as state property, leading its original owners' descendants to pursue legal action to reclaim their ancestral land. Lawyer Bao Sheng-hao explained that under Article 12 of the Land Act, private land that becomes a lake or navigable waterway due to natural changes loses its ownership. However, the original ownership is generally restored once the land returns to its original state.

Bao noted that such cases often stem from the Japanese colonial era. Private lands were removed from registration due to river course changes. When these lands later reappeared through natural silting, embankment construction, or river management, land administration agencies often registered them as unregistered or ownerless state property. It is only decades later that descendants of the original owners discover this and initiate lawsuits.

To reclaim their rights, descendants must prove the current land is the same as their ancestor's, providing historical documents like land ledgers and old cadastral maps from the Japanese era, along with survey data from before and after the land reappeared. They also need household registration and inheritance records to establish their legal claim. Bao emphasized that ownership is only "constructively extinguished" by law for public necessity, not physically lost. Once the land physically re-emerges and its boundaries can be identified and compared to historical records, ownership is legally restored, even if the land remains within a river zone.

However, reclaiming ownership does not grant unrestricted use. Bao cautioned that if the land is still within a river zone, floodway, embankment area, or a river management plan, activities like construction, land filling, resource extraction, or altering the landscape are generally prohibited or require prior government permission. The right to demand government acquisition or compensation is not automatic; it typically arises only if the restrictions effectively deprive the owner of use, the government occupies the land exclusively for an extended period, or public facilities are built on it. Bao also pointed out that the Constitutional Court's ruling (112th Constitutional Interpretation No. 20) clarified that the state cannot deny the return of land registered as state property after WWII if it was originally privately owned during the Japanese era, using the 15-year statute of limitations as a defense. He recommended the government establish a proactive system for investigating and cross-referencing historical data, rather than placing the burden on individuals.