English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113311/144292 (79%)
Visitors : 50923386      Online Users : 898
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139587


    Title: 自兩項人權公約之民族自決權論原住民族諮商同意權之規範基礎與實踐
    The Right to Consult of Indigenous Peoples and Its Implementation: In the Context of the Right to SelfDetermination of Peoples Under the ICCPR and the ICESCR
    Authors: 徐揮彥
    Contributors: 法學評論
    Keywords: 原住民族;原住民族基本法;自決權;美洲人權法院;諮商同意權;憲法增修條文;國際勞工組織第169號公約;原住民族權利宣言
    Indigenous Peoples;Indigenous Peoples Basic Law;Right to Self-Determination;Right to Consult;Inter-American Court of Human Rights;ILO Convention No. 169;Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
    Date: 2019-09
    Issue Date: 2022-04-08 10:10:09 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 回顧近幾年所發生政府或企業擬在原住民族傳統領域進行開發或利用，因未實踐對原住民族之諮商義務所引發的爭議事件顯示，原住民族基本法第21條所規定原住民族諮商取得同意理念之落實，長期面臨行政機關的漠視，其原因與本條規範基礎的模糊及內容的不確定有關。本文之目的在從兩項人權公約為中心的民族自決權規範，探究諮商同意權的規範基礎 ; 補充其內涵發展及要件，並審視我國對原住民族諮商同意權之實踐狀況及其問題。據此，本文第貳章將自國際人權法規範，探討對原住民族最核心的權利──自決權之內涵及其與諮商同意權之規範關係，並釐清諮商同意權之內涵及實施之要素。第參章將對美洲人權法院關於原住民族諮商同意權之「Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador」案，在本文之目的下進行分析，並審視本案對原住民族諮商同意權實踐之意義與價值。第肆章則回到我國法制，分析憲法增修條文的原住民族條款，並探究民族自決權在我國憲法的地位與內涵，再接續分析原住民族基本法第21條諮商同意權規定在的規範內涵 ; 精神及要件，並輔以我國涉及原住民族諮商同意權行政法院判決的探討，探究諮商同意權在我國落實之狀況及問題。最後，本文在第伍章基於第貳章及第參章之發現，審視我國對原住民族諮商同意權實踐之問題，並提出調整建議。
    The article 21 of the Indigenous Basic Law which provides the right to consult of the indigenous peoples has entered into forced over 13 years, but its implementations are still very weak. This situation reflects the reluctance of administrative branch to fulfil its obligation under this article, and the reason might be the normative incompleteness of the article. This research aims to explore the normative content and basis of the right to consult in the context of right to self-determination under the ICCPR and ICESCR and by reference to the jurisprudence of Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the right to consult of the indigenous peoples, hoping to reconstruct the content of this right under the domestic legal system of Taiwan.
    Relation: 法學評論, 158, 229-294
    Data Type: article
    DOI 連結: https://doi.org/10.3966/102398202019090158004
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202019090158004
    Appears in Collections:[政大法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    8.pdf2196KbAdobe PDF2174View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback