設成首頁 | 加入最愛 | 新訊連結 | 聯絡律師 | 推薦朋友 | 線上投稿 | 律師簡介 | 律師諮詢 | Facebook | 隱私權聲明 文章總數:208081 瀏覽總數:526969218
文章總數:208081 瀏覽總數:526969219
點選此處可回到首頁!
法律知識庫 課程講座 法律圖書 電子報中心 回首頁
台灣法律網新訊



團結一心才有防疫法學
【林蕙瑛專欄】價值觀的差異問題
註記境管台胞違法嗎?
青年做頭家不是嗆聲,而是學習謙卑說服
武漢肺炎可能後遺症與勞保失能
【林蕙瑛專欄】暗戀的滋味
匹夫觀點- 陰魂不散的台灣無薪假
都是“口罩無用論”惹的禍?
公寓大廈共有人將自己分管範圍,同意他人使用收益者,該他人是否無權占有?
能否僅以建築法或建築技術上之規定為酌定鄰地通行事項之基礎?
【林蕙瑛專欄】對性愛感情的標準比較寬鬆
習慣法於形式法論證過程中的補充性—觀察法律適用脈絡中抽象概念充實之過程
刑法第356條損害債權罪之行為主體為「將受強制執行之際的債務人」,而非泛指一般債務人,屬純正身分犯
【林蕙瑛專欄】同性戀或異性戀的戀情
從疫病防治回看「宗教自由」之界限
【勞保言語失能】言語吞嚥機能適用胸腹部強制退保嗎?
關於醫師法第28條所稱醫療業務及醫療行為之闡釋及責任
蔡英文陳時中都不是帝王,修法才是王道
享有親權之人,得否為刑法第241條第1項、第3項之和誘未滿十六歲之男女,以略誘論之犯罪主體?
【林蕙瑛專欄】友誼沒有信任與寬容,是經不起考驗的
除案情複雜難以查明者外,行政訴訟事實審法院應依其查明事證核實確認,在納稅者聲明不服之範圍內定其數額,亦即以課稅處分為審理及判決對象
司法院大法官釋字第790號解釋摘要-栽種大麻罪案

 台灣法律網 > 法律知識庫 > 時事評論 > 社會短評

原住民族或其他弱勢族群的自治地位與保障(七)

文 / 施正鋒教授
【台灣法律網】


參考文獻

Archer, Keith.  2003.  “Representing Aboriginal Interests: Experiences of New Zealand and Australia.”  Electoral Insight, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 39-44.

Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission.  1999.  Regional Autonomy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities. (pdf)

Australia, Australian Electoral Commission.  2002.  History of Indigenous Votes.  Kinston, ACT: Australian Electoral Commission.

Ayres, Sarah, and Graham Pearce.  2002.  A Preliminary Review of Alternative Approaches to Regional Governance in the West Midland.  Birmingham: Aston Business School, Aston University.

Balogh, Sandor.  1999.  Autonomy and the New World Order.  Toronto: Matthias Corvinus Publishing.

Banducci, Susan, Todd Donovan, and Jeffrey A. Karp.  2004.  “Minority Representation, Empowerment, and Participation.”  Journal of Politics, Vol. 66, No. 2, pp. 534-56.

Barkan, Joel D.  1993.  “Elections in Agrarian Societies.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 107-16.

Bauböck, Rainer.  2001.  “Territorial or Cultural Autonomy for National Minorities?”  IWE, Working Paper Series, No. 22.

Boisvert, David A.  1985.  Forms of Aboriginal Self-Government.  Background Paper, No. 2.  Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen’s University.

Canada, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND).  1995.  Aboriginal Self-Government: The Government of Canada’s Approach to Implementation of the Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government.  (http://www.inac.gc.ca/pubs/selfgov/policy.html)

Canada, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND).  n.d.  “Does the Literature Develop Arguments about How Fiscal Relations Would Best Support Self-Government?  If So, What Are These Arguments?”  (http://www.ainc- inac.gc/pr/ra/rev/deag_e.html)

Canada, Minister of Supply and Services.  1996.  Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.  (http://www.austlii.edu.at/au/journals.OLD/AILR/1998/ 4.html)

Canada, Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP).  1996.  People to People, Nation to Nation: Highlights from the Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.  (http://www.inac.gc.ca/rcap/report/index.htm)

Cohen, Frank S.  1997.  “Proportional versus Majoritarian Ethnic Conflict Management in Democracies.”  Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 30, No. 5. (EBSCOhost Full Display)

Cornell, Stephen.  2002.  “The Harvard Project Findings on Good Governance.”  Speaking notes at the Speaking Truth to Power III, BC Treaty Commission, March 14-15.

Durie, Mason.  1998.  The Politics of Maori Self-Determination.  Auckland: Oxford University Press.

Eide, Asbjørn.  1995.  “Minority Protection and World Order: Towards a Framework for Law and Policy,” in Alan Phillips, and Allan Rosas, eds. Universal Minority Rights, pp. 87-112.  Turku/Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Institute for Human Rights.

Elazar, Daniel.  1997.  “Contrasting Unitary and Federal Systems.”  International Political Science Review, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 237-51.

Fiscal Realities.  1998(2003).  Indigenous Peoples and Fiscal Relationships: The International Experiences.  Ottawa: Ministry of Indian Affairs and Northern development.

Fiscal Realities.  1997.  “First Nation Taxation and New Fiscal Relationship.”  Paper presented to the Indian Taxation Advisory Board, and the Department of Indian Affair and Northern Development.

Fleras, Augie.  1985.  “From Social Control towards Political Self-Determination: Maori Seats and the Politics of Separate Maori Representation in New Zealand.”  Canadian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 551-76.

Fletcher, Christine.  n.d.  “Does Federalism Safeguard Indigenous Rights?”  (http://www.ciff.on.ca/Reference/documents/bg_papers/docbg_fletch.html)

Franks, C.E.S.  2000.  “Rights and Self-Government for Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples,” in Curtis Cook, and Juan D. Lindau, eds. Aboriginal Rights and Self-Government, pp. 102-34.  Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Frideres, James S.  1998.  Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: Contemporary Conflicts. 5th ed.  Scarborough, Ont.: Prentice-Hall Allyn & Bacon Canada.

Frowein, J. A., and Ronald Bank.  2000.  “The Participation of Minorities in Decision-Making Process.”  Council of Europe.  (http://www.humanrights.coe. Int/Minorities?Eng/InterGovernmental/Publications/dhmin20001.htm)

Gál, Kinga, ed.  2002.  Minority Governance in Europe.  Budapest: Local Government and Public Reform Initiative.

Gál, Kinga.  2000.  “The Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and Its Impact on Central and Eastern Europe.”  Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, Flensburg, Germany: European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI).

Groves, Robert.  1987.  “The Engine of Agreement: Financing Aboriginal Self-Government,” in David C. Hawkes, and Evelyn J. Peters, eds. Issues in Enriching Aboriginal Self-Government, pp. 97-109.  Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen’s University.

Gutmann, Amy.  1994.  “Introduction,” in Amy Gutmann, ed. Multiculturalism, pp. 3-24.  Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Hawkes, David.  n.d.  “Indigenous Peoples: Self Government and Intergovernmental Relations.”  (http://www.ekloges.com.cy/nqcontent.cfm?tt= article&a_id=1474)

Hawkes, David C., and Allan M. Moslove.  1989.  “Fiscal Arrangements for Aboriginal Self-Government,” in David C. Hawkes, ed. Aboriginal Peoples and Government Responsibility: Exploring Federal and Provincial Roles, pp. 93-137.  Ottawa: Carleton University Press.

Horowitz, Donald L.  2003.  “Electoral Systems; A Primer for Decision Makers..”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 115-28.

Horowitz, Donald L.  1993.  “Democracy in Divided Societies.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 18-38.

Iorns, Catherine J.  2003.  “Dedicated Parliamentary Seats for Indigenous Peoples: Political Representation as an Element of Indigenous Self-Determination.”  E Law, Vol. 10, No. 4. (http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/siies/v10n4/iorns104_text. html)

Ishiyama, John T.  1999.  “Representational Mechanisms and Ethnopolitics: Evidence from Transitional Democracies in Eastern Europe.” Eastern European Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 2. (EBSCOhost – Full Result Display)

Jull, Peter.  2002.  “Constitutional Work in Progress: Reconciliation and Renewal in Indigenous Australian and the World.” (pdf)

King, Preston.  1982.  Federalism and Federation.  Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Kingsbury, Benedict.  2002.  “Reconciling Five Competing Conceptual Structures of Indigenous Peoples’ Claims in International and Comparative Law.”  New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 34, pp. 189-250. (pdf)

Knight, Trevor.  2001.  “Electoral Justice for Aboriginal People in Canada.”  McGill Law Journal, Vol. 46, pp. 1063-1116.

Konig, Matthias.  1999.  “Cultural Diversity and Language Policy.”  International Social Science Journal, Vol. 51, No. 161. (EBSCOhost)

Kymlicka, Will.  1998.  Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ethnocultural Relations in Canada.  Don Hills, Ont.: Oxford University Press.

Kymlicka, Will.  1995.  Multicultural Citizenship.  Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Kymlick, Will, and Wayne Norman.  2000.  “Citizenship in Culturally Divided Societies: Issues, Contexts, Concept,” in Will Kymlicka, and Wayne Norman, eds.  Citizenship in Divided Societies, pp. 1-41.  Oxford: Oxford University.

Léger, Marie, ed.  1994.  Aboriginal Peoples: Toward Self-Government.  Montreal: Black Rose Books.

Lijphart, Arend.  1999.  Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries.  New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

Lijphart, Arend.  1991.  “Constitutional Choices for New Democracies.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 72-84.

Lijphart, Arend.  1986.  “Proportionality by Non-PR Methods: Ethnic Representation in Belgium, Cyprus, Lebanon, New Zealand, West Germany and Zimbabwe,” in Bernard Grofman, and Arend Lijphart, eds. Eletoral Laws and Their Political Consequences, pp. 113-23.  New York: Agathon Press.

Lijphart, Arend.  1984.  Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Thirty-One Countries.  New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

Linz, Juan J.  1990.  “The Virtues of Parliamentarism.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 84-91.

Loughlin, John.  1998.  “Autonomy Is Strength,” Democratic Dialogue, Occasional Paper, No. 10, pp. 13-36.  Belfast: Eastern Health & Social Services Board, Northern Ireland Economic Council.

Mendoza, Carlos.  n.d.  “Indigenous Struggles for Political Recognition and Participation in Guatemala: Long Walk to Democratic Consolidation.” (pdf) 

Meyers, Gary D., and Brenda R. Landau.  1998.  “Environmental and Natural Resources management by Indigenous Peoples in North America: Inherent Rights to Self-Government, Part 1: The US Experience.” (http://www.austlii. edu.au/special/rsjproject/rsjlibrary/arccrp/dp3.html)

Norris, Pippa.  2004.  Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Norris, Pippa.  n.d.  “Ballots Not Bullet: Testing Consociational Theories of Ethnic Conflict, Electoral Systems and Democratization.” (pdf)

Oam, Gatjil Djerrkura.  1999.  “Indigenous Peoples, Constitutions and Treaties.” Paper presented at Dialogue on Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth, London, July 23.

OSCE/ODIHR.  2004.  “Republic of Croatia: Parliamentary Election 23 November 2003.”  OSCE/ODIHR Elections Observation Mission Report.  Warsaw.

Parekh, Bhikhu.  2000.  Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory.  Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan Press.

Peters, Evelyn J.  n.d..  “Self-Government for Aboriginal People in Urban Areas: A Literature Review and Suggestions for Research.” 

Polanco, Héctor Díaz.  1997.  Indigenous Peoples in Latin America: The Quest for Self-Determination.  Boulder, Colo.: Westview.

Prince, Michael J., and Frances Abele.  2002.  “Paying for Self-Determination: Aboriginal Peoples, Self-Government, and Fiscal Relations in Canada.”  Paper prepared for the Conference on Reconfiguring Aboriginal-State Relation, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen’s University, November 1-2.

Pyle, Andrew, ed.  1995.  Group Rights: Perspectives since 1900.  Bristol: Thoemmes Press.

Quade, Quentin L.  1991.  “PR and Democratic Statecraft.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 36-41.

Reilly, Benjamin.  2003.  “Political Engineering of Parties and Party Systems.”  Paper prepared for delivery at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31. 

Reilly, Benjamin.  2002.  “Electoral Systems for Divided Societies.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 156-70.

Reilly, Benjamin.  2001.  Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Robotin, Monica, and Levente Salat, eds.  2003.  A New Balance: Democracy and Minorities in Post-Communist Europe.  Budapest: Local Governmental and Public Service Reform Initiative.

Rush, Mark E., and Richard L. Engstrom.  2001.  Fair and Effective Representation: Debating Electoral Reform.  Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

Scherrer, Christian P.  n.d.  The First Indian Government in the Americas Caught up in Neglect, Confusion and Disunity – Way Out?  Working Paper, Copenhagen Peace Research Institute (ciao).

Schouls, Tim.  1996.  “Aboriginal Peoples and Electoral Reform in Canada: Differentiated Representation versus Voter Equality.”  Canadian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 729-49.

Shapiro, Ian, and Will Kymlicka, eds.  1997.  Ethnicity and Groups Rights.  New York: New York University Press.

Sigler, Jay A.  1983.  Minority Rights: A Comparative Analysis.  Wesport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

Sisk, Timothy.  1993.  “South Africa Seeks New Groups Rules.”  Journal of Democracy, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 79-91.

Shugart, Matthew Soberg, and Scott Mainwaring.  1997.  “Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America: Rethinking the Terms of the Denbte,” in Scott Mainwaring and Matthew Soberg Shugart, eds.  Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, pp. 12-54.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tanase, Ioana.  2003.  “Defining National Minorities: Old Criteia and New Minorities.”  Paper prepared for Seminar Series Citizenship and National Minorities in Europe, St. Antony’s College, University of Oxford, January. (http://sant.ox.ac/uk/areastudies/ Tanase.htm)

Tully, James.  2000.  “A Just Relationship between Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Peoples of Canada,” in Curtis Cook, and Juan D. Lindau, eds. Aboriginal Rights and Self-Government, pp. 39-71.  Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Turpel, Mary Ellen.  1993.  “The Charlottetown Discord and Aboriginal Peoples’ Struggle for Fundamental Political Change,” in Kenneth McRoberts, and Patrick Monahan, eds. The Charlottetown Accord, the Referendum, and the Future of Canada, pp. 117-51.  Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Van Cott, Donna Lee.  2000.  “Explaining Ethnic Autonomy Regimes in Latin America.” Paper presented for the 22nd International Congress of the Latin America, March 16-18, Miami. (http://www.grocities.com/tayacan_2000/dvancott.html)

Van Cott, Donnal Lee.  n.d.  “Latin American Constitutions and Indigenous Peoples.”  (http://web.utk.edu/~dvancott/constitu.html)

Venice Commission.  2000.  “Electoral Law and National Minorities.”  Strasbourg: European Commission for Democracy through Law, Council of Europe.

Von Mettenheim, Kurt.  1997.  “Introduction: Presidential Institutions and Democratic Politics,” in Kurt von Mettenheim, ed.  Presidential Institutions and Democratic Politics: Comparing Regional and National Contexts, pp. 1-15.  Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Wall, Denis.  1999.  “Aboriginal Self-Government in Canada: The Case of Nunavut and the Alberta Métis Settlements.”  (http://www.ualbert.ca/~walld/NUNSEPT2. html)

Watts, Ronald L.  1998.  “Federal Systems and Accommodation of Distinct Groups: A Comparative Survey of Institutional Arrangements for Aboriginal Peoples.”  Working Papers, IIGR, Queen’s University.

Wherrett, Jill, and Douglas Brown.  1994.  “Models for Aboriginal Government in Urban Areas.”  Report prepared for Policy and Strategic Direction Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

Wickliffe, Caren, and Matiu Dockson.  2001.  “Maori Development in a Global Society: Options for Constitutional Change.” Paper presented at Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth, South Pacific Regional Expert Meeting, Nadi, Fiji, October 15-16.

Wilson, John.  2003.  “The Origin of the Maori Seats.”  Background Note, New Zealand Parliamentary Library.

施正鋒。2005。《台灣原住民族政治與政策》。台中:新新台灣文化教育基金會/台北:翰蘆圖書出版公司。

施正鋒。1999。《台灣政治建構》。台北:前衛。

施正鋒。1998。《族群與民族主義──集體認同的政治分析》。台北:前衛

施正鋒(編)。1995。《台灣憲政主義》。台北:前衛。

 

 


 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
* 發表於輔仁大學若望保祿二世和平研究中心主辦「2005年第五屆和平學學術研討會」,台北,淡江大學台北校區,2005/11/26。感謝行政院研究發展考核委員會對於本研究的補助。

[1] 嚴格來說,少數族群(ethnic minority)是指被支配的族群,譬如過去南非的黑人,他們人數雖然比白人多,卻仍然被通稱為少數族群;相對地白人在人數上居劣勢,卻不能稱為少數族群;也關的討論,見施正鋒(1998:5-6)。

[2] 聯合國的『個人隸屬國籍、族群、宗教、或語言性少數族群權利宣言』(1992) 將少數族群分為國籍、族群、宗教、以及語言四大類(第2條)。

[3] 平埔族以虛線表示,是因為除了被國家承認為原住民的噶瑪蘭人以外,其他族的集體認同仍相當隱晦。

[4] 確實的用詞是「邊疆地區各民族」(第168、169條)、或是在邊疆地區的「各民族」(第26、64條)。其實,憲法裡頭另外提到「民族」,應該指的是nation,也就是在提到「民族生存」(第156條)、「民族健康」(第157條)、以及「民族精神」(第158條)之際。

[5] 不過,目前學術界的共識是少數族群不包括弱勢的社會團體 (social group),譬如女性、殘障、或是同性戀。

[6] 不管考古上的證據有無、或是文書上的記載如何,國際上對於原住民的認定,並不是由漢字「顧名思義」所想當然爾的「最先的住民」(first、original inhabitants)

[7] 有關於國際法學者對於原住民特別權利的看法,見Kingsbury(2002)。

[8] 也就是「少數族群」(ethnic minorities)的「集體權」(collective rights、group rights)。有關於集體權的一般理論,見Pyle(1995)、以及Shapiro與Kymlicka(1997)。

[9] 當然,Kymlicka (1995: 107-30)另外還提到其他兩種正當性:歷史協定、以及多元文化的價值。參見James Tully(2000)從自由式民主的觀點來看原住民的自治權。

[10] 在這個公約、以及上述宣言裡頭,種族 (racial group)、以及種族歧視的用法,可以看出種族被當作普遍性的族群概念用。

[11] 也就是如何確保原住民的個人權利不被歧視。

[12] 至於所謂的「邦聯」(confederation),指的是主權獨立國家之間鬆散的結合體。

[13] 有關於兩者優劣的文獻很多,譬如von Mettenheim(1997)、Shugart與Mainwaring(1997)、以及Linz(1990);特別討論到調解族群權力關係者,見 Horowitz(1993)、以及Lijphart(1991)。

[14] 當然,也有非地域式的聯邦(non-territorial federation),又稱為「組合式聯邦」(corporate federation),也就是採取個人的文化自治(cultural autonomy);見Lijphart (1984)、Bauböck, 2001。

[15] 一般而言,聯邦政府主管國防、外交等對外事宜,州政府享有教育、商務等對內權限。

[16] 其實,在聯邦體制之下,也有可能出現中央集權的現象;見King (1982)、Lijphart (1984)。

[17] Ruth Lapidoth將自治分為地域/政治自治(territorial political autonomy)、行政自治(administrative autonomy)、以及個人/文化自治(personal cultural autonomy)三種(Ayres & Pearce, 2002: 32)。

[18] 有關少數族群自治、權力下放、或是區域主義的文獻汗牛充棟,見Gál (2002)、Ayres及Pearce (2002)、Balogh (1999)、Loughlin (1998)、以及Polanco (1997)。

[19] 原住民族的自治權利,並非來自其在歷史上的先例、或經驗;即使原住民族真的曾經有過類似聯邦的理念、或是體制,並不代表原住民族的自治就一定要透過聯邦制來實踐。

[20] 譬如德國的Schleswig-Holstein邦,儘管丹麥黨只有兩席,卻仍然被賦予黨團的地位;見Frowein 與 Bank(2000:註38)。

[21] The Reindeer Herding Administration and the Sami Educational Council;見Frowein & Bank(2000),註62。

[22] 譬如Norris(2004、n.d.)、Horowitz(2003)、Reilly(2002、2001)、Rush與Engstrom(2001)、Ishiyama(1999)、Cohen(1997)、Barkan(1993)、Sisk(1993)、Quade(1991)、Lijphart(1986)。

[23] 墨西哥的眾議院採取政黨比例代表制(Watts, 1998: 30、38),不過,原住民在Yucatan、Chihuahua、以及Oaxaza三個州的人口居多數,因此,即使是採取單一選區制,應該也可以確保相當的席次。

[24] 也就是自成一體的「選區」、或是Banducci等人(2004: 535)所謂的「雙軌選區」(dual constituency system);目前台灣原住民的立委選舉,可以說是分為兩平地原住民、以及山地原住民大選區。究竟這種分立式的選舉是好(實踐自決權)、是壞(種族隔離),見、Iorns(2003)、以及Fleras(1985)的討論。

[25] 這就是換算公式,其他面向還有投票結構(投票對象、以及投票過程)、以及選區結構(選區範圍、以及選區大小);見施正鋒(1999:230)。

[26] 共有15個政團,包括保加利亞人、俄羅斯人、猶太人、日爾曼人、吉普賽人、阿爾巴尼亞人、塞爾維亞人、土耳其人、希臘人、烏克蘭人、亞美尼亞人、波蘭人、斯洛伐克人/捷克人等等。相關法令,見http://users.skynet.be/suffrage-universel/romi.htm

[27] 參見『克羅埃西亞國家議會代表選舉法』(1999)第15-17條(http://www.legislationonline.org/ view.php?document=54716&ref=true),以及『少數族群權利憲政法案』第19條(http://www. legislationline.org/view.php?document=55656)。

[28] 譬如Schouls(1996)就以違反選票等值,反對加拿大以保障名額來確保原住民族的代表。

[29] 邏輯上而言,如果就單一選區/複數選區、以及是否採取保障名額兩個面向來看,總共有四種可能。

[30] 根據『保障少數族群架構條約』(1995,第16條),國家不可以以任何方式,使少數族群在其原鄉的人口比例下降。這裡應該有兩種意思,也就是反對外來人口蜂擁而至、或是反對打散少數族群。

[31] 也就是我們一般的區域選舉、或是平地/山地原住民的選舉方式。

[32] 就理論而言,總共可以有36(3×2×3×2)種可能,不過,Boisvert (1985) 只討論了15種可行的模式。

[33] 有關於原住民自治區的財政安排,見Fiscal Realities(1998)、Hawkes與Moslove(1989)、以及Groves(1987)。

[34] 美國總統柯林頓在1994年與印地安人及阿拉斯加土著部落領袖歷史性會面談話(President Clinton’s Remarks in Historical Meeting with American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Leaders, 1994)。

[35]『外坦吉條約』(Treaty of Waitangi, 1840)、以及『外坦吉條約法』(Treaty of Waitangi Act, 1975)。

[36]『瑪莫案第一號』(Mabo No. 1, 1988)、以及『瑪莫案第二號』(Mabo No. 2, 1992.)。

[37] 包括阿根廷(1994)、玻利維亞(1994)、巴西(1988)、哥倫比亞(1991)、厄瓜多爾(1998)、瓜地馬拉(1985)、墨西哥(1992)、尼加拉瓜(1987)、巴拿馬(1994)、巴拉圭(1992)、祕魯(1993)、以及委內瑞拉(1999)等國;見Van Cott(n.d.)、以及Mendoza(n.d.)。

[38] 見http://www.abo.fi/instut/ESC-files/kap5.htm

[39] 譬如說研考會在2004年提出政府改造案,以效率為由力主廢除原民會,可能是忽略倒兩次民間制憲會議所提憲法草案原住民專章中所揭櫫的「中央政府應設立掌理原住民族事務之專責機構」。澳洲國會在1998年對於『原住民土地法』(1993)提出歧視性的修正案,也讓原住民深深體會到,如果沒有憲法上的保障,原住民的權利是隨時可以被剝奪的(Oam, 1999: 11)。

[40] 有關這些憲法草案,見施正鋒(1995)。


------------------------------------------------------------------------
行政院原住民族委員會「憲法原住民族政策制憲推動小組」定稿(2004/11/16)。
 

(全文完)

寄給朋友     友善列印

 

作者簡介
施正鋒教授
學歷:美國The Ohio State University政治學系博士、美國Iowa State University政治學系碩士、台灣大學農業經濟系學士
現職:東華大學民族事務暨發展學系教授、淡江大學公共行政學系暨公共政策研究所兼任教授
學術專長:政治學(國際關係、比較政治學)
文章轉載自 https://www.facebook.com/cfshih2012 http://faculty.ndhu.edu.tw/~cfshih/

 

 

本單元最新10篇文章
霸凌受害者心聲:為什麼老是找我 / 蘇荃
如何避免自己成為下一個人倫悲劇主角 / 蘇荃
學校教育與惡的距離 / 蘇荃
社會工作與惡的距離 / 宜璐
閱讀張忠謀 / 施正鋒教授
只需一個想法的轉變,就能避免人倫悲劇的重演 / 宜璐
我個人認同中的台中一中 / 施正鋒教授
李敖的笑傲人生 / 施正鋒教授
教育部的放水就是學術的墮落 / 施正鋒教授
不要瞧不起自己的學生,特別是在職專班 / 施正鋒教授
  本單元更多文章......

 

免 費 電 子 報
發刊期數: 3722
推 薦 課 程
《房地產法律課程》房地產仲介糾紛處理 (劉孟錦律師)
《房地產法律課程》共有房地糾紛處理 (劉孟錦律師)
《房地產法律課程》土地買賣合建契約糾紛處理 (劉孟錦律師)
《房地產法律課程》成屋買賣契約糾紛處理 (劉孟錦律師)
《房地產法律課程》預售房屋契約糾紛處理 (劉孟錦律師)
《企業法律課程》帳款催收法律實務:保全程序篇(假扣押) (劉孟錦律師)
《生活法律課程》生活法律:婚姻三部曲--婚姻.夫妻財產制.家庭暴力法律問題解析 (劉孟錦律師)
《企業法律課程》交通事故和解技巧與賠償訴訟法律實務 (劉孟錦律師)
《生活法律課程》夫妻財產相關法律問題 (劉孟錦律師)
《房地產法律課程》公寓大廈糾紛處理與訴訟法律實務 (劉孟錦律師)
法 律 叢 書
請點選此圖觀看本書更詳細的介紹!
【台灣法律網電子書】房地產案例實務(九)
劉孟錦.楊春吉
定價:NT $ 1000元
網站連結
律師 法律事務所
律師事務所 法律
法律專欄 劉孟錦律師
一帆法政補習班 台灣本土法學
法律翻譯 e速人氣生活網
品味人生 永恆婚禮顧問
合法律師查詢 合法地政士查詢
合法經紀業查詢 不動產實價查詢
不動產資訊平台 房地產交易價格
不動產交易服務 全國法規資料庫
法學資料檢索 法拍.庭期查詢
立法院法律系統 民事.非訟費用
重大通緝犯查詢 商工行政服務
地政資訊e點通 定型化契約範本
司法院書狀範例 國家圖書館
地名檢索系統 地籍圖資系統
地政法規資訊 Hinet地政服務
總統府法令查詢 最新犯罪手法
165反詐騙 食品安全衛生

設成首頁 | 加入最愛 | 新訊連結 | 聯絡律師 | 推薦朋友 | 線上投稿 | 網站合作 | 律師簡介 | 律師諮詢 | Facebook | 隱私權聲明
法律具時效性,內容僅供參考,不宜直接引為訴訟用途,具體個案仍請洽詢專業律師
所有文章係作者之智慧,請尊重智慧財產權,轉載重製節錄請先取得本網之書面同意