Editing Eminent domain (section)

==Asia==

=== China ===
In [[China]], "requisitions", the Chinese form of eminent domain, are constitutionally permitted as necessary for the public interest, and if compensation is provided. The 2019 Amendment of the Land Administration Law of China spells out rather detailed guidelines, guaranteeing farmers and those displaced greater financial security.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Arya J. |first1=Taghdiri |title=A Comparative Perspective of Eminent Domain Laws in the United States & China |journal=Tsinghua China Law Review |date=December 20, 2019 |volume=12:115 |issue=12 |pages=115–141 |url=http://www.tsinghuachinalawreview.org/articles/PDF/TCLR_1201_Taghdiri.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210826112941/http://www.tsinghuachinalawreview.org/articles/PDF/TCLR_1201_Taghdiri.pdf |archive-date=26 August 2021 }}</ref>

=== India ===
{{Main|Land Acquisition in India|The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013}}
The [[Constitution of India]] originally provided for the [[Fundamental rights in India|Fundamental]] [[Right to property]] under Articles 19 and 31. Article 19 guaranteed to all citizens the right to "acquire, hold and dispose of property". Article 31 provided that "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." It also provided that compensation would be paid to a person whose property had been "taken possession of or acquired" for public purposes. In addition, both the state government as well as the union (federal) government were empowered to enact laws for the "acquisition or requisition of property" (Schedule VII, Entry 42, List III). It is this provision that has been interpreted as being the source of the state's "eminent domain" powers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://openarchive.in/judis/1119.htm |title=THE STATE OF BIHAR v. MAHARAJADHIRAJA SIR KAMESHWAR SINGHOF DARBHANGA AND OTHERS |access-date=2008-10-15 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110721180417/http://openarchive.in/judis/1119.htm |archive-date=2011-07-21 }}</ref>

The provisions relating to the right to property were changed a number of times. The [[forty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution of India|44th]] [[Constitution of India#Amendments|amendment]] of 1978 deleted the right to property from the list of Fundamental Rights.<ref name="44amact">{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend44.htm |title=The Constitution (Amendment) |website=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2016-08-08}}</ref> A new article, Article 300-A, was added to the constitution to provide, "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." Thus, if a legislature makes a law depriving a person of his property, it will not be unconstitutional. The aggrieved person shall have no right to move the court under Article 32. Thus, the right to property is no longer a fundamental right, though it is still a constitutional right. If the government appears to have acted unfairly, the action can be challenged in a court of law by citizens.<ref name="pgA33">Tayal, B.B. & Jacob, A. (2005), ''Indian History, World Developments and Civics'', p. A-33</ref>

Land acquisition in India is currently governed by the [[Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013]], which came into force on 1 January 2014.<ref name=LARR2011>{{cite web |title=The Land Acquisition, Rehabilation and Resettlement Bill, 2011 – Full Text of Bill |publisher=Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India |url=http://rural.nic.in/latest/bill_chapter_07092011_E.pdf/ |access-date=2014-01-07 |archive-date=2016-03-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304044800/http://rural.nic.in/latest/bill_chapter_07092011_E.pdf/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> Until 2013, land acquisition in India was governed by [[Land Acquisition Act, 1894|Land Acquisition Act of 1894]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bhattacharyya |first1=Debjani |title=The history of eminent domain in colonial thought and legal practice, Special Section Artic… 9 Pages The history of eminent domain in colonial thought and legal practice |journal=Economic and Political Weekly |date=2015 |volume=50 |issue=50 |url=https://www.academia.edu/17572189 }}{{Dead link|date=September 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> However the new LARR (amendment) ordinance 31 December 2014 diluted many clauses of the original act.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Ordinances/RTFCTLARR%20Ordinance%202014.pdf |title=The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Ordinance |date=2014 |website=Prsindia.irg |access-date=2016-08-08 |archive-date=10 February 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150210123705/http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Ordinances/RTFCTLARR%20Ordinance%202014.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>
The liberalisation of the economy and the Government's initiative to set up special economic zones have led to many protests by farmers and have opened up a debate on the reinstatement of the fundamental right to private property.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Should-right-to-property-return/articleshow/4202212.cms |work=[[The Times of India]] |first1=Dhananjay |last1=Mahapatra |title=Should right to property return? |date=28 February 2009}}</ref>