China's Property Law has long taken effect, but it seems that society still has little respect for individual's property rights.

Li Anding (The Economic Observer): Cars are not cheap in China, and apart from the car itself, Chinese car owners have to pay all kinds of taxes and fees for their cars. Thus they have the right of legally using their own cars.

If the odd-even restrictions are made permanent, they will violate car owners' rights and even cause a loss of private property. It's as ridiculous as saying house owners are only allowed to go home on alternate days.

Car owners are not using roads for free and they may be paying more than car owners in any other countries to use the road. The rapid development of China's road construction in recent years is largely attributed to private car owners who contribute a large portion of the money needed for this purpose.

In Beijing, car owners and their families account for almost half of the city's population, so to impose the restrictions is not so much just for the majority's interests as it sounds.

To develop public transportation and improve traffic management, and even impose congestion charges or designate car-free zones in certain areas, are all effective solutions to tackle the traffic problem.

In Western countries, the public transport system meets over 60 percent of the traffic needs, but in Beijing, despite recent years' rapid development, the rate is only 30 percent. It will take a long time before Beijing's public traffic network is sufficiently developed. Private cars are an important supplement to the public transport, especially when the latter is unable to meet many

people's needs. If the odd-even restrictions are forced on drivers, the public transport system may break down because of the heavy pressure.

Zhang Ming (China Youth Daily): The Chinese authorities possess strong administrative powers. It can even manage to forbid city residents from going outdoors when it considers this necessary, let alone car use limits. The government's administrative power should not be abused. This power can not only bring immediate results, but also create a lot of problems. The authorities have their work cut out for them if they wish to ensure a smooth traffic flow after the restrictions are lifted.

In the face of traffic congestion, the authorities should accelerate the development of public transport networks with subways as the core, and not impose various restrictions on private cars. It's better not to make the excuse that the restrictions are for the good of the majority of residents.

Roads are public property

Xue Yong (China Youth Daily): Actually the odd-even restrictions are more about the sharing of public resources than about car owners' property rights. The measure does not necessarily mean to take over owners' cars.

Public facilities are part of public resources. When the resources are rich, their use should not be restricted, but when they become scarce, the situation is different.

Beijing's streets are highly congested and its air pollution is a widely recognized problem. Thus roads and air have become scarce public resources in Beijing. The odd-even restrictions are practiced because a small fraction of car owners are abusing the scarce public resources.

Car owners may feel it unfair that their right of using cars is limited. But they should understand that while cars are their own property, the roads belong to the public.

Whether to extend the odd-even restrictions or not is a difficult problem. At present, it's best to be decided through a referendum by all Beijing residents.

Tong Dahuan (The Beijing News): some people are opposed to using a referendum to decide whether the odd-even restrictions should be made permanent, because they believe car owners only maker up a small fraction of the city's population. According to the Beijing Traffic Management Bureau, by February 20, 2008, Beijing had already been home to 3.2 million cars and every day there is another thousand more cars added to this number. In some cases, official or company cars are used by an entire family. Thus, suppose every Beijing family has 2.9 people, then actual car users amount to over 9 million, which is half of the city's population.

Some believe, everyone has the right to possess cars (property right) and freely use cars. This basic human right can't be decided through voting or opinion polls. However, we must not forget that the precondition for people's property rights and freedom is that the rights and freedom do not affect others. Why are some polluting manufacturers closed? Is this a restriction or even deprivation of citizens' property rights? No, it is because wider public interests need to be catered for. It is the same with car usage.

Ma Longsheng (Yangcheng Evening News): According to a recent survey conducted by the Beijing Times, 82.9 percent of non-car owners support the restrictions while the support rate for car owners is as high as 48.5 percent.

The higher-than-expected support rate implies that almost 50 percent of car owners have realized that if the government does not impose the odd-even restrictions, they will inevitably be hampered by worsening traffic congestion. The restrictions force them to reduce the use of cars, but the traffic then becomes smooth. So they have nothing to lose.

As for whether the restrictions should be extended, I believe the way out is to conduct an extensive survey. As for the debate on rights, it's a matter between car owners and non-car owners. Who should be responsible for the other side's losses? The focus should not be whether the authorities have violated car owners' property rights.