{"title":"存在与非存在的法庭","authors":"J. Upton","doi":"10.3167/jla.2022.060202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article explores the challenges faced and practices developed by Taiwanese judges in cases involving Indigenous laws and lands to fulfil the objectives of Taiwan's Indigenous court units. Despite the official establishment of these units, local actors debated their real presences within Taiwan courts. Non-Indigenous actors administered proceedings, state laws and justice practices applied, the language of Han mainstream society dominated legal discourse, training for judges and prosecutors was minimal, and court unit proceedings generally replicated ordinary court procedures, rendering the units ambiguous as distinct institutions. While some judges ignored these ambiguities, other judges endeavoured to integrate Indigenous world views, ontologies and meanings into applications of new laws and procedures through varied strategies. In practice, these exploratory approaches constituted the Indigenous court units in Taiwan courts. While these strategies may, in certain circumstances, create possibilities for improving Indigenous recognition within the national court system, they could also work against Indigenous people in their bids for justice through the courts.","PeriodicalId":34676,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Anthropology","volume":"759 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Courts of being and non-being\",\"authors\":\"J. Upton\",\"doi\":\"10.3167/jla.2022.060202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis article explores the challenges faced and practices developed by Taiwanese judges in cases involving Indigenous laws and lands to fulfil the objectives of Taiwan's Indigenous court units. Despite the official establishment of these units, local actors debated their real presences within Taiwan courts. Non-Indigenous actors administered proceedings, state laws and justice practices applied, the language of Han mainstream society dominated legal discourse, training for judges and prosecutors was minimal, and court unit proceedings generally replicated ordinary court procedures, rendering the units ambiguous as distinct institutions. While some judges ignored these ambiguities, other judges endeavoured to integrate Indigenous world views, ontologies and meanings into applications of new laws and procedures through varied strategies. In practice, these exploratory approaches constituted the Indigenous court units in Taiwan courts. While these strategies may, in certain circumstances, create possibilities for improving Indigenous recognition within the national court system, they could also work against Indigenous people in their bids for justice through the courts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34676,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Anthropology\",\"volume\":\"759 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2022.060202\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2022.060202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This article explores the challenges faced and practices developed by Taiwanese judges in cases involving Indigenous laws and lands to fulfil the objectives of Taiwan's Indigenous court units. Despite the official establishment of these units, local actors debated their real presences within Taiwan courts. Non-Indigenous actors administered proceedings, state laws and justice practices applied, the language of Han mainstream society dominated legal discourse, training for judges and prosecutors was minimal, and court unit proceedings generally replicated ordinary court procedures, rendering the units ambiguous as distinct institutions. While some judges ignored these ambiguities, other judges endeavoured to integrate Indigenous world views, ontologies and meanings into applications of new laws and procedures through varied strategies. In practice, these exploratory approaches constituted the Indigenous court units in Taiwan courts. While these strategies may, in certain circumstances, create possibilities for improving Indigenous recognition within the national court system, they could also work against Indigenous people in their bids for justice through the courts.