While in Smangus, do as the Smangusians do.

Welcome to Village of Smangus

Please follow the rules below:

1.Please check in at the registration station on your left. Notify an employee if you have made a reservation for accommodation.

2.Government officials should show ID to pass the registration station.

3.Park your car in parking area.

4.No camping is allowed.

5.Lower your voice after 10 p.m.

6.No plants or any agriculture products should be collected or removed.It is your responsibility to protect the forest.

Smangus Village

Translated by Ya-Yun Teng, New York University

The Statements of Declaration, from The Conference of Pihaban Alliance

Translated by Tony Chu, Taiwanese/American Fellowship Presbyterian church in New Jersey, USA

Time: May 20 - 21, 2007
Place: the village of Smangus

When we Tayal people face intruders and threats, Pinhaban is a traditional cultural ceremony held to make alliance among the villages to protect our own territories. This time we elaborate the meaning the ritual and expand the coverage to make alliance among the people of different ethnicities. Together we stand firm to safeguard our land.

On May 20 evening. The elders of Mrqwang group of the Tayal nation recited chants to describe traditional territories –

Lmuhu (Tayal ancient chant. See note) - is one of the most important elements in Tayal culture. It is sung to describe the nation's historical chronicle, the management over public or private affairs, communication, etc.

The ceremony of Pinhaban was held in Smangus on May 20 and 21. The participants, called Mrhuw, represented their chiefs of communities: Ulay, Tayax, Quri, Smangus, Cinsbu, M'utu, Qara, Pyaway, Pyanan, R'ra, Slaq, Btang, Rahaw, Butasya, and Pnaway. Some were from the original place of Tayal, Mrqwang. The purpose of the gathering was for assuring Tayal traditional territories. In addition, some fellows were of other nations, including Bunun, Paiwan, Amis, and Puyuma.

A few village chiefs / Mrhuw of Tayal Mrqwang group, along with the others, led to sing the chant Lmuhu in describing the history, stories, migration, and many things that happened in the traditional territories. Talking about something happy, the participants laughed together. In terms of something sad, the participants wept. About the other events bringing indignation, the participants swore to stand up as one body to defend our lands.

The chief of the village of Mrqwang said: " We indigenous peoples are knowledgeable of our own traditional territories. We can accurately describe the landscapes of the mountains and the rivers in them. We name those natural objects and connect our own lives so closely with the surroundings. The staff of the Forestry Bureau does not understand our lives. When we heard the staff say that the traditional territory of Smangus is only about 12 acres, we regarded the notion absurd. The territory is absolutely larger than this measure.

In the same evening, we observed the ceremony of Msbalay (reconciliation). This was a ritual when the villages formed alliance; the members took oaths with millet wine and by touching water which represented cleansing and unity. The participants considered that it was the time the indigenous peoples of Taiwan should unite to bravely safeguard our own lands.

On May 21, Pinhaban Alliance Forming ceremony --

Every elder took turn to sing the ancient chant Lmuhu, reviewing the topics which had been discussed and also rekindling the enthusiasm. The elders emphasized that the communities of the indigenous peoples in Taiwan should solidify together. On that day the participants also sign their names on a wood map of Taiwan to show their loyalty to this newly formed alliance. From then on, any unjust issue happening to any indigenous community of the participants became the common concern of all the alliance members.

The statements of the Pinhaban Alliance are as the follows:

1. The indigenous peoples in Taiwan should be treated with the greatest respect. Let's unite to protect and guard our lands.

2. Every indigenous community should summon its own assembly, voicing the right of autonomously governing its own traditional territories.

3. The administration for the windfall beech event should apologize to the people of Smangus in order to remove the stigma the people suffer from. The administration also should pay apology to the land, forest, and the native people who are humiliated.

4. Based on the Tayal code of traditional territory, the Forest Bureau is seen as the one that steals the beech. According to the Tayal traditional law, the thief should pay fine and be punished.

5. We demand the administration to embody the spirit of "new partnership" with the indigenous peoples and to implement the Aboriginal Basic Law without default.

Host: Smangus Community Assembly

Sponsor: Smangus Action Alliance

Contact: Lahwy Icyeh

Blog: http://smangus.blogspot.com/

Email: smangustgbil@gmail.com

Note: Lmuhu used to be applied for expressing sentiment, narrating community migrating history, and negotiation.

Comments on Executive Yuan's responses to the appeals in May 30 Pinhapan protest Smangus organized for the case of windfall beech

By Smangus Action Alliance

Translated by Tony Chu, Taiwanese/American Fellowship Presbyterian church in New Jersey, USA

The Pinhapan 530 action alliance identified that the person who represented the administration in response to the alliance's appeals was the Executive Yuan Council member Liu, Yu-Shan (劉玉山) . After Liu spoke to the protestors, the chief of Smangus, on behalf of the people, immediately replied that "they (Liu's responses) are far short for being accepted!" The protestors then shouted "We want to see premier!" and attempted to enter the office building. The chief of Smangus quickly asked the protestors to be calm and give premier a chance within one month to respond to the appeals. The petitions, the responses Liu made on site and the alliance's comments on the responses are as the follows.

1. Paid apology in public and returned the beech trunk: we demand a public apology from the Forestry Bureau that should return the beech trunk back to Smangus.

Response: No response to the petition. Liu only said that this issue should be resolved in court. The Council of the Indigenous Peoples of the Executive Yuan would help the defendants' lawyer to make the case in favor to the defendants.

Comment: Such a notion was also stated by the Forestry Bureau on April 24. But the issue is -- The Forestry Bureau made a mistake in executing its administrative power. The staff violated the Aboriginal Basic Law article 21 by taking away the windfall tree in the indigenous people's territory without an agreement from the locals. The staff didn’t observe the Forestry Law article 15 which stated that "the indigenous peoples, in need of living in traditional ways, are right to collect the forestry produce," and instead accused the defendants of larceny. The people of Smangus are asking the Bureau for an apology and returning the beech. It is unbelievable that due to bureaucracy, the negotiation become so difficult. This same case can be judged based on the Aboriginal Basic Law articles 23 and 30 which state that indigenous people's traditional ways of living should be respected. As the Tayal people's cultural law actually regards the behavior of Forestry Bureau larceny, we argue that in reason the regard is legally valid. Is it inevitable that the people of Smangus have to turn around to accuse the Forestry Bureau of larceny based on the judiciary judgment for administrative wrongdoing?

Addition: the term "the indigenous peoples' territories" is based on the Aboriginal Basic Law article 2. It is referred to the land and reservation the indigenous peoples historically recognize. Based on the experience of dealing with the administrative officers, the indigenous people found that many officers who claim as lawful lack knowledge of the Law or intentionally avoid observing the term.

2. The indigenous peoples' traditional territories should not be trespassed on: we demand the Executive Yuan to diligently supervise the administrative bodies that in practice should observe the Aboriginal Basic Law. The indigenous people's right of keeping traditional territories should not be violated.

Response: Liu's statement was the same as what the Forestry Bureau had made. It was stated that the traditional territories would need to be delineated.

Comment: The response particularly angered the elders of Smangus. They questioned Liu "Please say it clearly that how many years we the native have been living on this land and how long your people have been here. Did your ancestors brought over our territories in their immigration to Taiwan?" The existence of indigenous peoples' traditional territories is a fact. The fact does not need delineation to make it true. The Executive Yuan is not administering based on the Aboriginal Basic Law. The Council of Indigenous Peoples is not actively showing the fact to the other administrative bodies. This default leaves the Forestry Bureau, the police, and the judges in court to know little about the fact.

The location of Smangus community is not at the borderline area between the indigenous and non-indigenous people. The location is certainly in the traditional land of indigenous people. The administration cannot dodge the responsibility of necessarily knowing this fact and use the lack of knowledge as an excuse to violate indigenous peoples' right. The Aboriginal Basic Law article 20 clearly indicates that the governmental body should recognize indigenous peoples' land and the peoples' right of reasonably using the natural resources in the lands. The administration, claiming that the definition of the land has not been made clear and further research is necessary, is tactically depriving of the right long due to the indigenous peoples.

3. Substantiate the Aboriginal Basic Law: We demand the Executive Yuan and Legislative Yuan to soon write and pass the children bills of the Law. Moreover, we demand the law to be actually implemented. By doing so, indigenous peoples' right of autonomy can be upheld.

Response: The administration responded that the writing of the detailed law was underway. Such a response of "we are working on it" to our petitions appears to be a posture of passiveness and reluctance. Defining and completing the coverage of the Aboriginal Basic Law relevant to the constitution is the administration's job. We urge the administration to do the job on an efficient and timely schedule. As the detail of the Law is incomplete, we are frustrated that even the articles of the existing Law are not observed by the administration. We criticize that the administration in practice did not follow the Law by consulting with us to avoid violating our right. The administration is the one that should be held accountable for the default. It will be absurd that we the people need to request the government to compensate our loss in order to wake up and improve the administration's attention and efficiency.

4. Open negotiating channels on an equal status: We demand premier to act as the coordinator of the Aboriginal Basic Law implementation committee and to coordinate the relevant departments for initiating the negotiation with the community assembly of Smangus in one month.

Response: None.

Comments: Our demand is based on the articles 3 and 4 of the Law. That is, the implementation of the Law should depend on "the will of the aboriginal nations" and therefore needs consultation with the indigenous communities. We consider that at this point asking the administration to only consult with us Smangus is a humble request. Although valuing our autonomy, we understand the challenge of completing the Law in detailed faced by the administration. Therefore we request the administration to deal with our case as an independent one. This should leave both parties a great room for negotiation. Even as facing the unjust charge in court, we people of Smangus still understand and call for a direct talk and collaboration between us and the administration. In contrast, the Executive Yuan is acting passively and has not revealed any will to respond to our call. At least right now we feel sorry for the administration that claims itself a servant responsive to people's needs.

In all, it appears to us that the administration has not sincerely observed the Basic Aboriginal Law and even acts to trivialize it. This windfall beech case of Smangus suffers reveals a serious mistake the administration needs to work right away to correct. Persevering, we people of Smangus urge and expect the administration to undertake improvement within a month.

【Smangus & Smangus Action Alliance News】

Pinhaban530 : Alliance of Defense and Offence:

Defend the Right to the Land of Smangus !

Who actually protects the forest? And who lives in harmony with her?
It is Smangus, not the Forestry Bureau!!
Why are we called “thieves” on our very own land?
We want to claim our innocence and ask for our dignity and rights!
Pinhaban530 is a inter-village, inter-tribe alliance of Taiwan indigenous peoples.
Let us ask the premier of the Executive Yuan to come out
to examine the present status of the Aboriginal Basic Law.
Let’s stand up for the rights of indigenous traditional territory and autonomy!

Time: 9:00 a.m., May 30, 2007
Place: (Meet at) the Control Yuan

The beech event of Smangus shows that our indigenous peoples have no dignity at all in the land of their very own. In the year of 1999, Mr. Shui-Bian Chen, as a candidate for presidential election, signed the contract of the New Partnership with the indigenous people in Lanyu Islet. He reaffirmed the New Partnership on behalf of the Office of the President in 2002. For the indigenous peoples, it was the year of great harvest in 2005, when the Aboriginal Basic Law was passed in Legislative Yuan. However, the act didn’t imply any the reorganization of indigenous peoples’ rights by the signed papers and passed laws. They are still conceived as thieves on account of taking the wind-fall beech in our own land. This is not a special legal case, but is that which takes place in the indigenous villages everywhere in Taiwan all the time. If they hunt, they are accused of violating Wildlife Conservation Act; if they take any of the rocks or wind-fall woods, they are judged of larceny of national forest woods and byproducts. Why are they called thieves when they take anything that may sustain their lives in our own land, while the enterprises can unscrupulously take all the forest resources? How come the state apparatus can sell the forests and the coastlines to them under the name of tourism and economic developments? In doing so, they have invaded the indigenous’ traditional territory. The government allied with industries, academic institutes and business to line their pockets with public funds, which resulted in the revenge of Nature. The mudslides and landslides have taken away so many lives and possessions. However, they are aloof from and indifferent to the catastrophes which cost them even more social resources for compensation. Worse than that, the government officials stigmatized the indigenous peoples of ecological collapse. The accused became the accuser! Cases of injustice take place all the time and everyone in indigenous villages is accused of larceny.

It is the time! Now is the time! No matter you are one of the indigenous peoples or not, please walk with us to the Executive Yuan on May 30. It is neither a protest nor a demonstration, for that wouldn’t be a right style of the lord of Taiwan land. We are going to the Executive Yuan to ask for the respect from the government to our indigenous rights and the dignity that we deserve.

Our Petitions

The Beech Event in Smangus was interpreted as a crime of larceny, which not only brought humiliation and grievance to Smangus and other indigenous tribes, but also the bewilderment to non-indigenous friends. Why is it so that the act of taking the wind-fall woods on the very land of one’s own is interpreted as the crime of larceny? For this reason, Smangus Action Alliance presents our petitions to the highest executive institution in the spirit of Aboriginal Basic Law, the Forestry Act and traditional Tayal Gaga.

1. Paid apology in public and returned the beech trunk: we demand a public apology from the Forestry Bureau that should return the beech trunk back to Smangus.

2. The indigenous peoples' traditional territories should not be trespassed on: we demand the Executive Yuan to diligently supervise the administrative bodies that in practice should observe the Aboriginal Basic Law. The indigenous people's right of keeping traditional territories should not be violated.

3. Substantiate the Aboriginal Basic Law: We demand the Executive Yuan and Legislative Yuan to soon write and pass the children bills of the Law. Moreover, we demand the law to be actually implemented. By doing so, indigenous peoples' right of autonomy can be upheld.

4. Open negotiating channels on an equal status: We demand premier to act as the coordinator of the Aboriginal Basic Law implementation committee and to coordinate the relevant departments for initiating the negotiation with the community assembly of Smangus in one month.

Convener: Batu Icyeh 886-911-257093

Head Executive: Omi Wilang 886-910-024675

Public Relations: Lahuy Icyeh 886-912-238070

Sponsor: Smangus and Smangus Action Alliance

Blog: Taiwan’s Indigenous Community –Samngus Battles for the Unfair Trail http://smangus.blogspot.com/

History of “Wind-fall Beech Event”

October, 2005
Terry the typhoon caused the damage to the only road that communicated the neighboring areas. Smangus people cleaned the road alone and put the windfall beech on the side. One month later, the staff of the Forestry Bureau chopped the wood into pieces and took them away secretly. Three of the Smangus youth transported the remains on behalf of the Tribal Committee for the purpose of community design. Consequently they were reported of stealing national woods. The accused became the accuser!

August, 2006
Summary Court said, “If you admit your crime and be fined NT$10,000 dollars, we can close the end like that.” They wanted to do away with it by money, but Smangus people were not going to let it go.

February 24, 2007
The judge of the first instance ignored the Article 15 of the Forestry Act and the Aboriginal Basic Law which protect the indigenous rights, but instead, he convicted them by Articlee 52 of the Forestry Act. The penalty was 6 months of imprisonment, the fine of NT$160, 000 for each person, and suspension of punishment for two years. Smangus people cried, “Why don’t you put all of us in jail?” Therefore, the whole village went on the road to Not Guilty Plea.

April 24, 2007
The stigmatization was unacceptable to Smangus people, so they went to headquarter of the Bureau to show their dissatisfaction and wrath and to ask for a public apology from them. We didn’t get any positive responses from them on that day. After that, the Bureau received pressure from all sides and thus wanted to talk with Smangus for negotiation. However, they are not welcomed in Smangus anymore.

May 7, 2007
Smangus held P’surux Btunux (set up a stone marker to make covenant) to declare the autonomy of the traditional territory. They built barriers at the entrance of the village to reject any police officers or Bureau staff who don’t observe the domestic laws. By doing this, they showed the determination to exercise autonomy.

May 20-21, 2007
Smangus held the Conference of Taiwan Indigenous Tribal Pinhaban (alliance of defense and offence), which was the united powere of villages and tribes who covenanted in the spirit of Pinhaban. Chiefs of Mrqwang communities from Tayal tribe chanted about the traditional territory by Lmuhu. They all thought that according to the present law (the Aboriginal Basic Law; ABL) and traditional law Gaga, the Bureau was the thief, who not only should be punished by the R.O.C. law but also by Gaga.

May 30, 2007
The premier of the Executive Yuan shall be the convener apparent of the Aboriginal Basic Law. It’s been three years since the law was enacted. Yet we do not see any progress in here. Apart from that, they connives their subordinate institutions, such as the Forestry Bureau, to turn a blind eye to the essential meaning and spirit of ABL. Not to mention that Council of Indigenous Peoples, of which the director-commissioner should be the natural executive secretary of the ABL promotion team, has been slothful and made the law ineffective as if it existed in name only. Worse than that, the law thus caused confusions to investigatory apparatus and judiciary system, who don’t have a clear idea about the principles of ABL. In other words, the indigenous rights are not factually protected, which incurs the frequent occurrence of unjust cases, in which the honest villagers are considered thieves. May 30 is a sacred and glorious day, when we will all walk to the Executive Yuan and declare the sacredness of our traditional territory and autonomy in the spirit of Pinhaban, the Alliance of Defense and Offence. By doing so we will demonstrate the determination of indigenous autonomy.

Translated by Yi-Ling Huang, Eco