The Cabinet’s greenlighting of the Indigenous Peoples Self-Government Act Sept. 23 was lauded by the government as a milestone in ROC history that moves the aboriginal people of Taiwan closer to self-rule.
The bill, which is pending legislative approval, was initiated under Article 4 of the Indigenous Peoples Basic Act. This legislation states that the “government shall guarantee the equal status and development of self-governance of indigenous peoples and implement indigenous peoples’ autonomy in accordance with the will of indigenous peoples.”
Following the Cabinet’s approval of the bill, ROC Premier Wu Den-yih said aboriginal self-rule will function under a policy that forbids alteration of existing jurisdiction within local government, leaves vested powers accorded to local authorities unchanged, and preserves the rights and benefits of non-aboriginal residents residing in self-ruled regions.
The act paves the way for indigenous peoples to begin negotiations with local governments to establish self-governing areas that would, in theory, extend across existing county and city borders. The proposed areas of aboriginal self-rule will not invalidate existing administrative boundaries and would be overseen by the central government in the same manner as city and county governments.
Indigenous peoples would also be granted the legal right to take the lead in handling issues relevant to their communities. Negotiations on issues arising from disputes involving overlapping jurisdictions of self-governing areas and neighboring county or city governments would, according to the legislation in its current form, be referred to the Cabinet for mediation.
On the same day the bill was approved, Sun Ta-chuan, minister of the Cabinet-level Council of Indigenous Peoples, described the legislation as the “most practical and substantive one [the government] could come up with to benefit Taiwan’s aboriginals.” However, the very people it was written to help have dismissed the act as “lacking teeth” and a political tool of the ruling Kuomintang.
One of the most contentious issues stemming from the law centers on the central government’s funding and status of the proposed self-governing indigenous regions. An aboriginal former member of the Examination Yuan said native communities are relegated to a status below townships, and the Indigenous People’s Action Coalition of Taiwan claims that self-rule dominion without rights over finance and land is little more than fake autonomy.
These two comments raise sensitive questions as to which government entities should fund such communities and by how much.
It is feared that prior to seeking funding for infrastructure projects from Taipei, self-ruled aboriginal areas would first have to obtain approval from city or county governments—entities that could stymie development projects simply because they want a bigger piece of the central government’s annual budgetary pie for themselves.
The central government said the act’s financial benefits, in regards to funding, fall short of initial expectations. And Sun has admitted the bill would raise the ire of local government if his office insists that aboriginal administered areas receive a share of tax revenues from the national coffers.
Another issue dividing supporters and critics of the act is the issue of land jurisdiction. This pertains to central government agencies charged with overseeing activities in self-ruled aboriginal lands. It is argued that by maintaining control over farming, forestry and water in these areas, the government could be reducing residents’ degree of autonomy.
For indigenous self-government to truly work effectively in Taiwan, the political authority of aboriginal councils must be written into the ROC Constitution. Binding governmental, institutional and social arrangements should be provided to allow for the representation, at all levels, of Taiwan’s aboriginal peoples.
But none of this is possible without major changes to the Constitution—something unlikely under the KMT administration. Without such reform, any rulings on issues regarding aboriginal self-rule would be at the mercy of a predominantly non-indigenous Legislature—a governing body that in 2008 saw its number of guaranteed indigenous seats reduced from eight to six.
If such a scenario arose, Taiwan’s aboriginal peoples would be left with little legal recourse, and unable to take issues to the Constitutional Court for constitutional interpretation. This may well leave the country’s 490,000 indigenous peoples belonging to 14 recognized tribes without self-rule as intended under the act.
Gavin Phipps is a Taipei-based journalist. These views are the author’s and not necessarily those of Taiwan Today. Copyright © 2010 by Gavin Phipps
Write to Taiwan Today at ttonline@mail.gio.gov.tw