「原住民族傳統智慧創作保護條例」與身分性文化敘述：排灣族巴格達外（Pakedavai）家族之實踐

The Indigenous Traditional Intellectual Creations Protection Act and the Discourse of Cultural Identity: The Practice of the Pakedavai Family in Paiwan

「原住民族傳統智慧創作保護條例」於2007年底經立法院三讀通過後，成為「原住民族基本法」最具代表性也最具實施可能性之子法。原住民族傳統文化成果之表達，在經過原住民族委員會認定並登記後，智慧創作歸屬之族群或部落可以取得「智慧創作專用權」。不過，該條例如何適用於台灣16個文化傳統、組織均不同的原住民族、原住民族社群應循何體制推選代表人與進行權利之集體管理、智慧創作之歸屬應如何判定等問題，目前都未有實踐個案可供參考。本文以屏東縣、三地門鄉排灣族巴格達外（Pakedavai）家族於2012-2013年間參與原住民族委員會「原住民族傳統智慧創作保護試辦計畫」之歷程為研究對象，分析其之動機、共識之形成、就智慧創作歸屬之認知、推選代表人與進行文史調查之模式，以及其擬申請保護標的的文化特殊性，接著討論該計畫對於巴格達外家族內部與外部帶來之影響，以作為「原住民族傳統智慧創作保護條例」解釋與未來實施的參考。本個案說明該條例提供原住民族社群形塑自我認同、維繫共同記憶之機能，使其得從掌握對自身文化傳統之敘述權力出發，擺脫漫長外來統治對其集體精神之壓迫，建立自治之基礎。此個案也證立了原住民族集體權利制度必然會因為社群之差異，而有多元之實踐。

The Indigenous Traditional Intellectual Creations Protection Act (ITICPA) of Taiwan intends to implement the right of cultural self-determination of the indigenous peoples officially vowed by the 2005 Fundamental Law. With certification and registration cultural expressions are entitled to the ethnic group and protected as a substantive property rights. However, since there are 16 ethnic indigenous groups on the island, each with diversified customary laws and political organizations, no unified regime of entitlement in either procedural or substantive aspects can be applied, leaving no precedence to follow due to its novelty. This paper studies the experiences learned from the participants of the 2012-2013 ITICPA Moot Program-the Pakedavai family of the Paiwan ethnic group, including their motives, formulation of collective consents, and perceptions over the propriety. This paper also analyses the elections of their tribal representatives, the documentation of their own history and the impact over their tribal consciousness, which provides valuable evidence of the regime's feasibility. Through the study a side effect to reinstate self-identity and reconstitute self-orientation brought by the ITICPA is also realized. In the meantime, the Moot practice shows that diversified management mode of collective property rights actually exists.