問題與研究

期刊內容 Issue content

回列表

黃之棟(Morgan Chih-Tung Huang)

下載檔案

59卷3期(2020/09/01)

2016年8月1日原住民族日當天，蔡英文總統代表政府正式向原住民族道歉。自此之後，臺灣的原住民族政策便邁入了新頁。在眾多後續討論中，原住民族自治議題尤其受到族人與各界的關注。對此，現階段政府的規劃，是希望參酌美加紐等國經驗，透過「實質談判程序機制」來達到自治。此方案近似於前述原住民族先進國所採取的「條約模式」，也就是透過原住民族和國家(中央、地方政府)協商談判並簽訂協定的方式，來確認進而規範兩者間的關係。面對此一嶄新的方案，各界的討論卻相對有限。無獨有偶地，近來澳洲也對條約機制的引進，展開了一系列的討論。有鑑於此，本文擬從該國對相關機制的思索乃至論辯出發，希望以此來作為未來我國制度規劃時的借鏡與反省。整體來說，條約制度的引進必然會觸及既有憲政架構的更動乃至主權議題，這也使得相關討論會涉及理論論證與法制磨合。由於這些議題具備高度政治性，故也相當敏感。對此，作者嘗試從政策學習與制度磨合的角度出發，嘗試以憲法肯認、條約、原住民族主權三位一體的理解，來捕捉澳洲對相關議題的討論。除此之外，由於條約機制實務上經常被用來作為國家正當化其權力來源的工具，故作者也對引進此制度可能的限制進行分析。

In 2016, President Ing-wen Tsai apologized to the Taiwanese indigenous peoples on behalf of the government, which is known as the National Apology. Echoing this National Apology, the Council of Indigenous Peoples reaffirmed its proposal called the “substantive negotiation process”. Before long, this innovative treaty-making provision opened a debate on whether or not such process can really fit in with Taiwan’s current constitutional and legal system. As a way to move forward, this article attempts to scrutinize similar treaty debates in Australia. In doing so, it has become more clear that treaty-making, (indigenous) sovereignty, and the Constitution are not separate issues, but rather, a connected one. As treaty forms the basic relationships between government/state and indigenous peoples, the debate itself is about the fundamental question of power-sharing and decolonization. Given that the government often treats treaty-making as a way of legitimatizing its power, this article cautions that indigenous peoples must stay alert to the possible harms of treaty-making. There is always a danger that buying into coloniser’s concept, i.e. treaty or sovereignty, could sink the whole indigenous struggle into the frameworks of the settler’s/state’s logic.

期刊內容 Issue content

相關期刊