With the gaining of independence in Ukraine, in addition to the state, there appeared first a private, and then a communal form of land ownership.. However, this very right of ownership, and subsequently the decentralization reform, gave rise to problems that only proper legislative regulation can solve, Georgy Mogilny writes in an article for ZN. UA “How bills No. 8178-1 and 8225 turn the state into “King Midas”.

As the share of land in private ownership grew, problems began to appear when the objects necessary for the state or the community could only be placed on privately owned lands or plots under private development.

“The Law of Ukraine No. 1559-VI, adopted in 2009, provides for the possibility of forcibly alienating land plots, but only as an exception to the motives of public necessity and the construction of transport and energy infrastructure facilities and cemeteries necessary for the development of the city,” the author writes..

He explains that authorities are not even allowed to simply buy land to meet public needs with the consent of a private owner for far from all purposes.. From socially important objects, this can be done for the planting of city parks, the construction of preschool educational institutions, recreation areas and stadiums.

“Such restrictions on the alienation of private property require perfect planning of the territory during development and transfer of land to private ownership and strict control over its observance - correcting the consequences of errors or violations is not only very expensive, but in many cases impossible. This is most critical for new residential development, which requires a significant number of various social facilities.. New housing has been built, residents need a clinic and a school, and there are no free communal plots for their construction nearby? Sorry, but local authorities have the right to withdraw land only for a cemetery,” the article says..

According to Mogilny, for the sustainable development of cities and the creation of a comfortable living environment, urban planning legislation must be balanced by legislation on the alienation of private land.

That is, the wider the developer’s opportunities regarding the free choice of the type of development of the site, the larger should be the list of public needs, for the implementation of which it is allowed to forcibly seize land and other real estate from private owners.

“This balance in the legislation has long been violated.. There are fewer free plots of communal property, in construction, since 2011, tireless deregulation has been carried out, therefore, instead of sustainable development of cities, they are constantly turning into ghettos unsuitable for a comfortable life,” the author notes..

Another problem he calls the complete absence of legislatively regulated mechanisms for the forced withdrawal of state property into communal property and vice versa from the communal property of one community to the communal property of another..

In particular, according to him, the decentralization carried out turned out to be quite successful, because the insolvent territorial communities would not allow direct political confrontation with the state authorities.. And land, as Mogilny explained, has become one of the weapons in these conflicts.. Recall at least the stories with the construction of the Shulyavsky overpass in Kyiv or a landfill for Lviv.

“Thus, the current legislative regulation negatively affected the development of Ukraine even in peacetime.. Active hostilities and significant destruction as a result of the aggression of the Russian Federation made these shortcomings critical - there are no necessary reserves of state and communal land for the construction of housing for internally displaced persons and the placement of evacuated enterprises. This problem cannot be solved within the framework of the current legislation, therefore reform is necessary, and this is beyond doubt.. But bills No. 8225 and 8178-1 are able to solve it? "

[see_also ids\u003d"

As you know, bills No. 8225 (on the forced withdrawal of plots without a court decision for the construction of critical infrastructure) and 8178-1 (on a simplified procedure for changing the purpose of agricultural land for subsequent development) were supported by the profile committee. The Rada rejected the last bill yesterday, but this does not mean at all that Bankovaya, which promoted it, will abandon its philosophy, and it will not appear again under a different number..

As expected, both draft laws became scandalous, and a number of publications appeared in the media about their serious shortcomings.. However, the unpopularity of the reform does not mean that it is not needed.. Therefore, let's see if there is a problem for the solution of which it is permissible to split society during the war, and whether these two bills solve it.