中文摘要 |
本文說明了原住民族傳統領域的意涵,釐清台灣原住民族傳統領域的土地分布,並駁斥官方一些似是而非的看法,也就是『原住民族土地或部落範圍土地劃設辦法』如何限縮了『原住民族基本法』。接著,我們回答了科技部有關於原住民族傳統領域劃設的探問,也就是作為研究課題可能面的疑點。再來,我們簡單介紹其他墾殖國家劃設原住民族傳統領域的三種途徑,包括政府劃撥、法律聲索、以及談判方式;另外,我們也看到兩種劃設要考慮到產權轉移、以及使用權。最後,我們由最消極的加拿大、到最積極的巴西,可以看出,不管是原住民族傳統領域的聲索、或是劃設,並未排除私有土地。
In this note, we start with a brief description of the concept ofindigenous territories followed by the delineation of the IndigenousTerritories in Taiwan. We then refute some official fallacies regarding theexclusion of private lands under the newly promulgated Regulations forDemarcating Indigenous Traditional Territories, which unduly underminesthe Indigenous Basic Law. We further reply to the inquiry from theMinistry of Science and Technology regarding the demarcation ofindigenous territories as a scientific subject. We succinctly illustrate howsettlers’ states have made efforts to solve the issue, including governmentalgrants, indigenous claims, and negotiations. Finally, we note that privatelands are not excluded from the demarcation of indigenous territories fromthe most conservative Canada to the most liberal Brazil. |
英文摘要 |
In this note, we start with a brief description of the concept ofindigenous territories followed by the delineation of the IndigenousTerritories in Taiwan. We then refute some official fallacies regarding theexclusion of private lands under the newly promulgated Regulations forDemarcating Indigenous Traditional Territories, which unduly underminesthe Indigenous Basic Law. We further reply to the inquiry from theMinistry of Science and Technology regarding the demarcation ofindigenous territories as a scientific subject. We succinctly illustrate howsettlers’ states have made efforts to solve the issue, including governmentalgrants, indigenous claims, and negotiations. Finally, we note that privatelands are not excluded from the demarcation of indigenous territories fromthe most conservative Canada to the most liberal Brazil. |