The Cabinet has passed a draft of "the Aboriginal autonomous regions act (AARA, 原住民自治區法)" which stipulates that Aborigines may set up autonomous tribal areas, either tribe by tribe, or together with other tribes.
This seems like a milestone in the establishment of Aboriginal autonomy, but it is in fact just another empty measure. As in the past, political manipulation is evident.
This is not the first time that the government has proposed a draft to establish Aboriginal autonomous regions.
Prior to the presidential election in 2004, the Cabinet passed a draft version of the AARA, which received massive media coverage at the time while Aborigines happily looked forward to the coming of a new era.
However, the Cabinet version of the draft encountered a great deal of criticism from the public for extensive revisions of the 104 articles drawn up by the Council of Indigenous Peoples, leaving only 15 articles of a declaratory character that lack detailed planning, which stymies development.
In the end, the review was discontinued as the legislative session expired and the draft died.
Today, after four years, a draft of the AARA with almost the same content except for three additional articles has once again been proposed ahead of a presidential election.
The intent behind the AARA is good, but appropriate supporting policies, further legislation and legal education are required before the act can be enforced.
Take the Smangus incident, for example. Even though the Aboriginal Basic Law (原住民基本法) has been passed and the Forestry Law (森林法) stipulates that Aborigines may legally collect forest products in their traditional tribal areas, three Atayal Tribe members who were accused of violating the Forestry Law by removing dead logs from fallen trees were sentenced to three months in prison.
They were also forced in September to pay a fine of NT$79,488 each.
Moreover, in May, several Paiwan Tribe members in Shihtzu Township (
Last month, the government announced the first traditional Aboriginal territory when it proclaimed both the Hsiujuan Village (秀巒村) and Yufeng Village (玉峰村) in Chienshih Township in Hsinchu County as a traditional Aboriginal area. However, this in fact limited the rights of and belittled Aborigines.
These examples have shown that many laws related to Aborigines are absent of real legal content and in reality are difficult to put into practice.
As similar incidents continue to emerge, how can we expect the government to be serious about the draft this time? Or is it just more false hope?
The New Partnership Treaty Between the Indigenous Peoples and the Government of Taiwan signed in 1999, the AARA draft passed in 2003, and the "Aboriginal territory" announced last month are in fact empty political promises.
As these promises repeatedly fail to be implemented, sincerity and expectations among Aborigines dissipate and the spirit of "multiculturalism" that the government has constantly emphasized is turned into a castle in the sky.
Will the second passage of the AARA draft be for real?
Can it truly establish Aboriginal autonomy?
Huang Yi-yuan is a student in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Ted Yang
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS