Send message to Author

Short abstract:

This paper is to explore, though decisions of Taiwanese judicial system, the extent and context of the multiplicity of self-governance of indigenous polities to reveal their legitimate collective consent lies upon the recognition of multiplicity in political culture and collective identity.

Long abstract:

While lacking of treaty-oriented constitutional bondage, the real-life self-governance of indigenous polities in Taiwan is postulated and passively morphed into diversified patterns in line with their perspective cultural heritage. However, the Central Government promulgated bylaws allows single self-governance formulae. Only the resolutions adopted through her rectified indigenous organizations and process, i.e., the Tribal Congress, would be recognized as legitimate expression of the polities’ consent. Since from the exploitation of indigenous traditional title land and resources to human related researches all require prior informed consent of the interested indigenous polities under Indigenous Fundamental Law of 2005, the conflicts between formal and real-life self-governance escalated. Many sought for judicial resolution. This paper is intending to explore, though the court decisions of Taiwanese judicial system, the extent and context of the multiplicity of self-governance of indigenous polities on the island, so to reveal the legitimation of indigenous collective consent lies upon the recognition of their multiplicity in political culture, traditional customs, and personal and collective identity. The decisions favored indigenous peoples’ pleas also evidence the judicial review serves as an indivisible check-and-balance mechanism in such a postulated indigenous self-governance regime. The covering decisions include several landmark cases of the year 2023 adjudicated by different levels of administrative courts.