Legal team flags coercive relocations, pastureland disputes in Qinghai's Tibetan nomadic regions

The visit came after appeals from local residents who raised long-standing concerns over pastureland ownership disputes, forced relocations, and the lack of fair compensation, according to a report by Tibet Times, as cited by Phayul. The report said that in several short videos shared on Dong Peng's private WeChat account around December 30, the lawyer outlined the scale and nature of grievances presented by nomads. He said many herders approached the legal team seeking solutions to pasture-related disputes that have remained unresolved for years, and in some cases for decades, Phayul reported.

Among the grievances, some nomads said unclear pasture boundaries had resulted in continuous disputes lasting decades, despite the presence of witnesses and official land documents. Others reported that their pastureland had been taken over by outside parties, with township authorities not only failing to step in but actively supporting the opposing side.

Several residents also recounted cases where highways were built directly through their pastureland. Although compensation was offered, sometimes as low as 1,800 yuan per mu, many rejected the amount as unjust. Despite their refusal, authorities or construction companies allegedly transferred the compensation directly into their bank accounts and went ahead with construction without consent. In many instances, residents said they were uncertain whether the county administration or construction firms were responsible for denying proper compensation, according to Phayul.

Further complaints included pastureland being flooded or damaged due to government construction projects, with no compensation or remedial action taken by the responsible authorities. In another video recorded after the legal team reached nomadic areas of Qinghai, lawyer Dong Peng responded to claims by local officials that nomads had relocated "voluntarily." He said that in reality, these relocations were carried out under heavy pressure, leaving little or no space for negotiation or meaningful consultation, Phayul reported.

Dong explained that officials often failed to secure written agreements or formal consent, instead repeatedly visiting households to pressure residents into relocating. In some cases, intimidation reportedly occurred both during the day and at night. He stressed that calling such relocations "voluntary" has no legal basis when there is no genuine consultation or agreement process beyond the one-sided imposition of compensation. According to Dong, such coercive practices are not isolated but widespread across Qinghai's nomadic regions, Phayul reported.

China's Grassland Law clearly sets out legal protections meant to safeguard grassland users. Articles 50, 51 and 52 of the law, along with Article 47 of Qinghai Province's implementation measures, state that activities such as land excavation, quarrying and mineral extraction on grasslands require prior approval from county-level grassland authorities. The law also requires compensation for grassland users in line with national and provincial regulations, as well as vegetation restoration within a specified period after project completion.

However, residents and legal observers said these provisions are frequently ignored. Authorities often justify land seizures by claiming grasslands are state-owned, allowing construction projects to proceed without following legal procedures, offering adequate compensation or carrying out environmental restoration. Lawyer Dong Peng said that under Chinese law, any eviction from pastureland, state expropriation or relocation must follow prescribed legal processes, including the right of affected communities to be informed, to take part in consultations, and to receive fair compensation and relocation benefits, as cited by Phayul. (ANI)