| There are essential differences between state ownership of natural resources (SONR) and real right in their subject, object, content, implement, responsibility, and so on. SONR is not a kind of real right which is used to cope with the property relations among equal subjects and entitle specific subjects to directly control specific objects, but a kind of constitutional power which provide legitimacy for the state who represents the whole people to intervene into the resource utilization by legislation and administration. SONR and natural resources real right are different things in different level, and they are not mutually exclusive but cooperative and complementary. SONR just provides a prerequisite to form the utilization order of natural resources, and natural resources real right is the key to the formation of the order. It should be determined by the specific provisions in the law whether some kind of recourses are monopolized by the public body. The natural resources which are just stipulated to be owned by the state in the constitution without specific real right rules in the law should be deemed to permit social members to utilize reasonably according to the principle of preoccupancy.There is no problem for the Heilongjiang people's congress to reclaim that the climatic resources belong to the state in the local legislation, but it is beyond its power and violates the constitution to lay restriction on the use of climatic resources. Meantime, as a kind of natural resources which has no specific real right rules stipulated in any law, the ebony which be found by somebody should belong to the founder, but the state legislative intervention can be taken when it is necessary. The deviation of the state-owned resources from the common people and public interest is due to the confusion between the public power and the private right and the absence of distinction between the public property and the private property. This should be changed. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号