On November 3rd the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment held a meeting on land-tenure issues, during which the Land Sub-sector Working Group (LSSWG) urged the government to lay down clear regulations on land expropriation, and to limit forced expropriation to public projects. This followed reports that Laos will soon allow foreign investors to buy land.

 

The recent series of meetings with organisations such as the LSSWG, composed of donor agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and others, followed a statement by a ministry official to the US-funded Radio Free Asia news agency in late October to the effect that proposed amendments to the land law would allow foreign investors to buy land where the investments were at least US$500,000.

 

Allowing foreigners—but not local citizens—to buy land would be a major change in a communist state where land is all state-owned and peasants merely have land-use rights. A ministry report published in 2013 stated that around 5% of the land area of Laos had been leased out to investors under concessions running up to 99 years.

(2013년 재무성 발표에 의하면  외국투자자에게는  라오스 토지면적의 약 5%가 99년 동안 사용할 수 있도록 리스됨)

 

Such land expropriation can provoke localised unrest, as well as foreign criticism of the Laotian government for trampling on peasants' rights. Peasants who lose their homes and land for development often campaign for compensation for years, with a notable example being the families whose land was expropriated for construction of the national sports complex outside the capital, Vientiane, to host the Southeast Asian Games in 2009, who have yet to receive compensation. Such disputes have led to a suspension of the granting of new land concessions since 2012, pending legislative change.

 

An amendment to land laws, if carefully handled, would encourage investment in Laos. However, the LSSWG argues that land-use rights should only be revoked with the informed consent of the land-use rights holders, except in the case of developments in the public interest, and that compensation should be paid to them at market rates. Even if such stipulations are made in the final legislation, it seems likely that officials in a country with an imperfect rule of law will, in practice, still be able to force people off land promised to investors in private deals.

Land legislation is likely to be amended over the forecast period. However, we continue to believe that land issues will give rise to localised political protest.