Taiwan's Indigenous Community-Smangus Battles for the Unfair Trial

Taipei times News :CIP(The Council of Indigenous Peoples, Taiwan ) defines boundaries over Smangus!

2007-10-21T00:05:00.000+08:00

By Loa Iok-sinSTAFF REPORTER Friday, Oct 19, 2007, Page 2 (Taipei Times)
More than two years after a group of Atayal Aborigines from Smangus Village in Hsinchu County were sentenced to prison terms by the Taiwan High Court for removing a fallen tree from the forest, the Council of Indigenous Peoples (CIP) made a "historic" announcement yesterday that defined boundaries of traditional domains belonging to Aboriginal villages in Hsinchu County.
"The 37,874.04 hectares of land belonging to Yufeng (玉峰) and Siouluan (秀鑾) villages of Chienshih Township (尖石), Hsinchu County, are now the traditional domain of the Atayal tribe," council Minister Icyang Parod announced at a news conference at the council yesterday.
"Local Aborigines may apply to gather forestry products for cultural and ritual purposes or private use," Icyang said.
A detailed map and set of guidelines on collection of forestry products were also announced yesterday.
The traditional domain definition came as a result of the Smangus case, Council of Agriculture Deputy Minister Lee Jen-chyuan (李健全) said at the press conference.
In 2005, three young men from the Atayal community of Smangus in Yufeng Village were indicted for stealing national property as they moved part of a fallen tree after a typhoon.
Although the Aboriginal Basic Law (原住民族基本法) protects Aborigines' rights to handle forestry products within their traditional domains, no legal document could prove the location of the fallen tree was within the Smangus community's traditional domain.
The three young men were found guilty by district and appeals courts earlier this year.
"The executive branch of the government certainly has no power over the judiciary, but we'll submit the documents to the court and would be glad to testify in court if necessary," Icyang said.
Jienshih Township Mayor Tseng Hsiao-chung (曾效忠) lauded the announcement as a "historic breakthrough."
Some Aboriginal rights activists and Smangus residents said the "guidelines" are far from perfect.
"The concept of Aboriginal autonomy outlined by the Aboriginal Basic Law is absent -- having to `apply' before being `allowed' to gather forestry products still puts Aborigines in an inferior position," said Lin Shu-ya (林淑雅), secretary-general of Taiwan Association for Human Rights.
Lahuy Icyeh, a Smangus resident, said that the announcement represented significant progress, but agreed that there was still room for improvement.
"We have our own traditional law regarding gathering forestry products. Requiring applications and the issuing of permits constitute repression of our traditional culture," Lahuy said in a telephone interview.
According to the guidelines, Aborigines must apply one month in advance for permission to gather forestry products.
"If someone's wounded and we need to gather herbs for medical use -- are we supposed to apply in advance too?" Lahuy asked.
Lahuy said that representatives from 20 Aboriginal communities among the two villages will meet to discuss relevant issues and present their opinions to the government.
In related news, three books on the history of the Taiwanese Aborigines were launched yesterday.
The three books, covering the Nanjhuang Incident and the migration histories of the Rukai and Bunun tribes, are the product of cooperation between the CIP and Taiwan Historica.
"In the past the most important events in Aboriginal history were never viewed from the Aboriginal point of view," Icyang told the audience at the launch of the book in Taipei.
Icyang said that the publication of the books was just the beginning.

Support for smangus: Dr. Jo An Zimmermann's letter, Melbourne Victoria University,Australia

2007-06-21T20:40:00.000+08:00

31 May 2007

I visited the Village of Smangus with my friend, Dr. Chih-Liang Chao in the department of Tourism Management of Providence University, while on a study tour in February 2006. It was a lovely community filled with people of a generous and outgoing nature. I was very impressed by their desire to maintain their culture and their natural environment as well as their willingness to share themselves with “outsiders”.

On the drive into the community I saw numerous places where landslides had occurred and damaged or completely removed sections of the road. From my experience, landslides of that nature are generally caused by a combination of factors – recent logging activities coupled with rain looked to be the culprits in many of the places I noted. In contrast, the trails that I walked around the village seemed well cared for and were built in such a way as to minimize environmental impact.

From talking to the people, their primary concerns are maintaining their culture as well as the natural environment which has been theirs to protect for many generations. I find it very distressing that people of this nature are being harassed and traumatized in the manner shown in the papers.

Taiwan should try and learn from other countries around the world that have destroyed their indigenous culture and now regret the loss. Please stop prosecuting the people of Smangus for their traditional ways of life. Stop now while you still have an indigenous culture to learn from and appreciate.

Sincerely,

Dr. Jo An Zimmermann, Research Associate
Institute for Community Engagement & Policy Alternatives
Victoria University
CRICOS Provider No.00124K

Room L208E, Ballarat Rd, Footscray
PO Box 14428
Melbourne VIC 8001 Australia
PHONE +61 3 9919 4018
FAX +61 3 9919 4539

Jo.Zimmermann@vu.edu.au
www.vu.edu.au

You Can Do to Help Smangus With…

2007-06-09T17:10:00.001+08:00

You can help by your countersignature either as an individual or as a group/ organization. There are two things you can help:

1 Countersignature by (individual or group) online
Countersignature by individual
Countersignature by group

2. Countersignature by fax (886-4-26530028, Attn.: Smangus Action Alliance) Please find the countersignature form below.

3. You can write a letter in support of Smangus and have it sent to any of the following government departments:

Office of the President, Taiwan
Email (please go to): http://www.president.gov.tw/en/
Tel: 886-2-23113731
Address: No. 122, Sec. 1, Chungking Rd., Taipei, Taiwan

Executive Yuan, Taiwan
Email (please go to):
http://www.ey.gov.tw/sp.asp?xdURL=mail/mail_en.asp&ctNode=210&mp=11
Attn. (the Premier): Mr. Chun-Hsiung Chang
Tel: 886-2-33566500
Address: No. 1 Sec. 1, Jhongsiao E. Rd., Taipei City, 10058 Taiwan

The Forestry Bureau
Email: service@forest.gov.tw
Tel: 886-2-23515441
Address: No. 2, Sec. 1, Hangchou Rd., Taipei City, 10050, Taiwan

Council of Indigenous Peoples, Executive Yuan, Taiwan
Email: icyang@apc.gov.tw
Attn. (the Director): Mr. Icyang Parod (Amis)
Tel: 886-2-25571600
Address: No.172, Sec. 2, Chongcing N. Rd., Datong District, Taipei City 103, Taiwan

4. You can go to http://smangus.blogspot.com/ to leave you comments to the articles without signing up or logging in. For anyone who wants to sign in, the google (gmail) account will work. If you want to post a new article, please send it to my email meadowling@gmail.com (Attn.: Yi-Ling Huang) with the author's name and affiliation. I will post it on the blog site.

5. You can go to http://atipc.homelinux.org/voices/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=212bac345a611176514939ed99e57e61 and express your opinions there for an open discussion.

6. If you are Christian, you can pray for Smanugs, who is now in a tough battle against injustice.

The First Conversation between Smangus and the Police (before P’surux Btunux)

2007-06-06T17:04:00.000+08:00

Time: May 06 2007 (The day before P’surux Btunux, the Tayal traditional ceremony which declares territorial sovereignty. P’surux Btunux involves setting up a stone marker to make covenant)

Place: Smangus Visitor Center

Smangus villager: Batu (the Directro-Convener of Smangus Action Alliance)

Police officers: Officer Feng from Tai-Gang Police Station, and the Chief Officer of Public Order Unit, Hengshan branch, Hsin-Chu County Police Bureau

On May 6th, Smangus and the Alliance issued a press release, announcing that an ancient and sacred ceremony P’surux Btunux will be held on May 7th. . Through this ceremony, Smangus declares its rejection to improper management of the state and its determination to manage its Qyunam (traditional territory). The press release also states that Smangus will set up a registration station in its entrance. After the press release was issued, police officers phoned in and physically visited the village several times on the 6th, the day before the ceremony, to express that they were concerned the barrier installation may be inappropriate, and that they wish Smangus villagers would consider the legality of such action.

1. The Conversation in the Smangus Visitor Center

At one pm, the Alliance convener Batu and Officer Feng from Tai-Gang Police Station had a conversation. Here are the main issues Officer Feng raised:

Officer Feng: 1. If there is going to be such an activity, the Police Station would expect to be notified. 2. The Police Station is concerned about Smangus’s actions. 3. From the press release regarding the P’surux Btunux ceremony, the supervising body (the Public Order Unit of the Heng-Shang branch) considers that it is “likely” a violation of the Assembly and Parade Act.

Batu: “La? (How come?) Please explain to your supervisors, the P’surux Btunux tomorrow is a very sacred Tayal ceremony.

Officer Feng: If you insist that this activity be held, we will send many officers to express our concern should our supervisors so order.

Batu: baha la, mha mwah simu lga, nanu pkita ta qalang myan suxan! (How come? If you really think this is the way it has to be, we’ll see you tomorrow in the village.)

2. Heng-Shan branch phoned in to express their concern that the P’surux Btunux on May 7th violates the Assembly and Parade Law.

Around 9 pm on May 6th, the convener of the Alliance Batu received a phone call from the Chief Officer of the Public Order Unit in Heng-Shan branch.

Chief Officer: “I’ve looked up related statutes. Religious ceremonies and activities are not subject matters of the Assembly and Parade Law. So for the activities tomorrow, let’s say that I ‘have given you permissions’.

“But do you have banners for tomorrow’s ceremony?”

Batu: “Yeah. How could this kind of ceremony violate the Assembly and Parade Law? If Chief Officer has time tomorrow, we welcome your participation. It is a very ancient and sacred Tayal ceremony.”

Translated by Shun-Ling Chen, SJD candidate, Harvard Law School &TIPA（Taiwan Indigenous Peoples' (NGO) Alliance）

I will stand up for you, Smangus. Lokah!

2007-06-06T17:00:00.000+08:00

Original Post: http://blog.roodo.com/duams_d/archives/3255709.html#comment-10483095

Translated by Shun-Ling Chen, SJD candidate, Harvard Law School /
TIPA（Taiwan Indigenous Peoples' (NGO) Alliance ）

我，以一位泰雅青年的身分，向司馬庫斯的族人致意。

I, as a youth of Tayal nation, give my due respect to my fellowmen in Smangus.

After learning about the Smangus wind-fall beech event from the Internet, I inevitably felt angry. Nevertheless, because I left my village since a young age, there also rose some mixed feelings. I’ve tried to avoid recognizing it as a predicament, and I have always thought that I could overcome. My village is nothing comparable to the remote Shangri-la, the village in the deep mountains in Hsin-chu. There is a convenient highway cutting through the village, tourist sites with much prospect of money, and many inhabitants who moved in from the plain area. I’d like to say this is more developed, but I don’t know what exactly it has brought to us. The convenience which I once thought it to be turns out to be tremendous harm.

On weekends, I used to visit my village if I don’t have other obligations. The previous time I was there, I stayed in the front yard with my family after dinner. I found more firebugs in the bushes than before. That was an evening, filled with beautiful scenes. I recalled that a year ago, the firebugs I could see in the front yard were less than one-third of the number I saw in that very evening. I thought this was the magnificence of Nature, but only to find out later that the several acres of woods behind my house were completely cut off. I was told that someone from outside of the village is conducting a development something there. But that area was the habitat for firebugs.

This is my village, and it is full of contradictories, like every other villages. One day, even grass and trees will turn away from you, and you gave these all up only to grab a bunch of money bills in hand. I wonder, even if we were only standing outside to watch it happen, aren’t we also indirectly facilitating this process? I left the village where I grew up when I was in the 4th grade to study in the urban area. I went there to learn from you (Han people) the way to step upward. I had to accept what you tried to teach me. Because you made these rules, gave us preferential treatments, but at the same time made us forget who we are. Perhaps everyone will try to trace back to find who they are in their growing up, but what about those who are unable to for being blind? Blindness, as eagles that forgot how to fly, and as fish that forgot how to swim, if we still remember our pride, how could we ever forget the village where we grew up.

I am not very proficient in my own language. What’s more, whenever I enter a village of indigenous people, I feel inferior for I have left my own for long. But I do feel proud of being an indigenous.

I will stand up for you. Smangus. Lokah!!

Some people say that my village will disappear in 50 years as a result of landslide. I say I don’t want to see my village lost and disappear because of being blind.

* Lokah is a Tayal expression which is used to invigorate and inspirit.

While in Smangus, do as the Smangusians do.

2007-06-05T22:07:00.000+08:00

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

2007-06-05T21:40:00.000+08:00

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

2007-06-05T21:15:00.000+08:00

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】

2007-06-05T21:00:00.000+08:00

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

Forest Guardians Find a Future

2007-06-03T01:05:00.000+08:00

By Zoe Cheng

Original Post on Taiwan Review, June 2007

The achievements of a small aboriginal community to develop a sustainable model of tourism are as inspiring as the natural heritage they want to conserve.

As a species, the Formosa Red Cypress came to Taiwan in the last ice age. The majestic trees grow at altitudes between 1,800 and 2,500 meters in Taiwan's cool, moist, often cloud-shrouded central mountains. These trees are certainly the oldest living things on Taiwan. The lifespan of a cypress can easily surpass 1,000 years; the oldest one found so far in Taiwan being over 4,000 years old. While cypresses have been growing here for millennia, the opportunity to see an old giant is pitifully rare. This isn't just because of the time it takes to grow--it needs more than 12 years to gain 1 centimeter in circumference--but also because of decades of deforestation since Japanese colonial rule (1895-1945). As a result, only a few forests, located in inaccessible areas have survived.

The rarer the towering cypress clusters have become, the greater people's interest in seeing them has grown. Forests of giant cypress have become a tourist attraction. For the mountain villages located near cypress forests this has brought economic benefits, but it has also brought environmental and social damage. The conundrum is how to strike a balance between exploiting the trees as a tourism resource while keeping at bay the overdevelopment and environmental degradation that tourism can bring. One community that may have solved this problem is Smangus.

Smangus, a village of the Atayal tribe, is perhaps one of the most remote communities in Taiwan. Situated in mountains in eastern Hsinchu County, it takes two and a half hours to drive a winding road at about 30 kilometers per hour to Neiwan, the nearest township. The village was the last in Taiwan to be connected to the national electrical grid in 1980, and also the last to get a road suitable for cars in 1995. Before the discovery of a forest of giant cypresses in 1991, Smangus villagers led a life that had changed little in centuries. Hunting and planting millet, taro, yams and bamboo were their main means of support; their main item of trade was dried mushrooms, the marketing of which involved a six-hour walk to the nearest village and a six-hour walk back.

Due to its geographical isolation, the storms of Taiwan's history have largely passed Smangus by, although during the Japanese colonial era the entire community was relocated. After Japanese rule ended, some villagers moved back to their ancestral land. "You won't find people over 80 years old here for they were moved out." Icyeh, the 64-year-old village head says.

Past Hardships

Until little more than a decade ago, to live in Smangus a person had to be almost unbelievably hardy. "Thirty years ago life here was so arduous," Icyeh says. Any modern convenience--a refrigerator, a TV set, a gas stove--had to be carried for eight hours from the nearest road. Emergencies like giving birth could sometimes be hard to handle. One child, called "Bridge," got his name because he was delivered at Smangus Bridge, only halfway to the hospital.

Only four years ago, the government set up an elementary school in the village on ground in front of the church. Before that, schooling took place in Hsinkuang, a village at the same altitude as Smangus, but separated by the Takechin Creek. This means a four-hour walk involving a steep descent to the river and then a grueling climb. The children walked to school on Mondays, usually arriving around lunch time, and home again Saturdays, staying on campus during the week in a bamboo hut erected by their parents and cooking for themselves. The junior high school was located even further away, an entire day's walk.

If Smangus seems to have been forgotten by society at large, its isolation has helped foster an attitude among its residents that it is under some divine dispensation--Smangus, they think, is "God's village." Remoteness has also held at bay some of the more corrupting influences of the outside world. "In the early years, there were no epidemics, and not enough money to buy rice wine, so no bottle men," says Icyeh, referring to the alcoholism that plagues many aboriginal communities.

Smangus was not the first aboriginal settlement to exploit the tourism potential of the giant cypresses. Tatkuanshan--formerly known as Lalashan--in Taoyuan county, was declared a nature reserve in 1986 because of its cypress forests. Indeed it was partly with the aim of following in Tatkuanshan's footsteps that Icyeh, around 15 years ago, started to search for a giant cypress forest around Smangus. He found one group of giant cypresses but unfortunately the biggest was knocked down by a typhoon.

Villagers kept on searching because their dreams repeatedly contained good omens, for example red and white sheep licking the root of a giant tree. Icyeh recalled legends saying that giant trees were located near red water. Working on this he eventually discovered Yaya Qparung, as the villagers call it, meaning "as great as mothers." Yaya Qparung, currently the second largest cypress in Taiwan, has a circumference of 20.5 meters, and is over 2,500 years old. "The cypress forest is 1,630 meters above sea level, making it more accessible than the previously discovered one," Icyeh says. Since then, Yaya Qparung has drawn countless visitors to Smangus.

More Than Just Trees

Often, visitors arrive having only forests of giant cypress in mind, but by the time they leave have discovered that what Smangus has to offer goes beyond Yaya Qparung. From the air one breathes, the spring water one drinks, a community setting strewn with Atayal wood carvings and traditional bamboo houses, a plethora of flowers, the song of the Formosan yuhina or call of the crested serpent eagle--the area is a feast for the five senses and fills visitors with a sense of delight. Even at night, walking around the foggy community under a starry sky and hearing the hoot of a collared scops owl or frogs' mating calls is enchanting, although the weather can be a little cool.

To see the cypress forests visitors need to start--preferably in the morning--from the village and take an ancient trail which traverses two cliffs, six lush stands of bamboo, several bridges and winds between hills on an easy but long hiking route. The entire hike is about 5.2 kilometers and takes from four to six hours. For those who register ahead of their visit, a native guide is available, who will often point out fascinating details along the trail. When Yaya Qparung and eight other giant cypresses are sighted, visitors simply stop and marvel at the hugeness of the trees. "Yaya Qparung looks like a person opening his arms to welcome you," Icyeh says. The trail is well maintained; fences and elevated wooden walkways have been set up to protect the roots and trunks from trampling.

For visitors with more time, a visit to the nearby Koraw Ecological Park is worthwhile. Koraw means "fat earth." This park is small, yet it is home to a number of endangered species, such as Swinhoe's pheasant, the Formosan giant flying squirrel and rare orchid varieties. Animal footprints are easily visible. An experienced guide can help visitors understand how Atayal hunters trap animals. Almost every feature of the park has a story to tell.

In fact, Smangus has made a great effort to get to where it is today. Twelve years ago, when it began to receive tourists, they faced a number of challenges. Competition for business among villagers was intense, leading to frequent conflicts. "In the first three years, villagers cared only for their own businesses. Relations between them turned so sour that we, being all Christians, looked like strangers to one another after church meetings. I thought it would be a disaster if such disagreements continued," Icyeh says. He was also worried that a lack of solidarity among the villagers would lead to outsiders being able to acquire their land, something which had happened in other aboriginal villages.

Birth of the Commune

"I tried to revive our ancestor's spirit of sharing to foster cohesion," Icyeh says. He took the lead to stand firm against the enticement of outside conglomerates. "If I put money before the wishes of the ancestors, I could have made a pile," he says. Step by step, village members started to pool their resources and run the restaurant and accommodation businesses collectively. A collective management system, tnunan in Atayal, finally came into being in 2004. Tnunan means a close interweaving of threads to make a beautiful pattern, the spirit of which emphasizes sharing and coordination. Participants in tnunan all signed agreements according to which they are co-owners of the land, the selling of which is not allowed. A tribal development association was also set up as the decision-making body for village affairs.

Three years on, they have built a restaurant that seats around 200 people, a canteen, a tourist information center and several guesthouses. Profits from the enterprises go into a community fund, which provides cradle-to-the-grave care for villagers. In addition, villagers who work get a monthly salary of NT$10,000 (US$320). "That's more than enough to live here," says Goyong, a young villager who returned to the community recently after living away for 16 years.

Tnunan has been practiced in Smangus for three years. Almost all the 25 households, some 80 to 90 people, living in the village have joined the collective. "Our ancestors often said that we shared one dining table, meaning that we are one family. We just practice what our ancestors told us," Yurow Icyang, a middle-aged leading member, says.

Each day as the sun emerges from the mountain behind the village, the males gather in a meeting area for job assignment. About the same time, children make their now short walk to school. After a short prayer, having received their job assignments, the villagers go to work, which can be cleaning up the community, repair work, interpreting for visitors, sculpture, house building or peach growing. Women work too. They clean guesthouses, take turns to cook, and some weave the cloth for which Atayal women are famous. Everything is run in an orderly way as the tourists begin to arrive.

Tourism is now the mainstay of the village's income. "Around 60 to 70 percent of revenue is raised from tourism," says Yurow. The rest is earned from crop and fruit sales. Currently, they receive about 350 tourists per day on weekends. "Actually, our goal is to reduce the number of visitors to 250 per day," Yurow says. "We want fewer visitors but higher quality." Currently, Smangus is coordinating with the Hsiuluan police office, which regulates the mountain permits that allow entry to the area, to control visitor volumes.

The Management Gurus

If it is the cypress forest that draws visitors, then it is the efficient management of the community's affairs and the strong cohesion among villagers that have started to draw young Atayal back to settle. This is a remarkable success because this village, like many others, used only to see young people move away, leaving only the elderly. "Kids of the mountain areas easily get into bad ways when they live in the cities. I hope they can find a place here," says Icyeh, who endeavors to promote a healthier lifestyle. "We put a 'non-smoking community' sign at the entrance to the village because we want to encourage our people to quit smoking," Icyeh says. "A lot of changes are visible now, which I feel very proud of." Abstinence from alcohol is also promoted. "We are happy even if only one or two quit drinking," says Icyeh. His father, who also used to be the village leader, died of cirrhosis of the liver resulting from alcoholism. "Now only a few old people drink or smoke. Work efficiency has improved a lot," Tgbil Icyang, a young father of two, agrees. "We hope visitors can stop smoking here, too, for safety's sake."

Among all the changes to their original lifestyle, the ban on hunting is perhaps the most difficult to accept. Many male villagers are accomplished hunters, their pride deriving from how many black bears or other formidable beasts they had killed. Expertise in hunting provided significant social status. But the villagers realize that hope for the future lies in ecotourism. "I quit hunting because wild animals have to be preserved," says Gumaih, an old hunter who has carved a knife on his door plaque to tell everyone about his glorious past.

There are other inconveniences the villagers have to endure--noise, garbage, and sometimes lack of privacy. Visitors have, for example, pitched tents in villagers' front yards or sat in on religious meetings. Also, not every visitor spends a night in Smangus, many just come for a half-day hike to the cypress forest. "When the safety measures are better, we will consider charging visitors a fee to cover cleaning up," Icyeh says. Smangus has provided all the necessary facilities and trail maintenance. "We do hope we will be permitted to manage this area," Icyeh says.

Perhaps Smangus' greatest achievement, however, is being able to create a future for itself and its children. So many other remote villages are struggling. "We encourage our kids to study hard and learn something related to the village's development so that they'll be able to make greater contributions," Tgbil says. There are now seven students at university and one at graduate school. Someday, the new blood will join their parents in making a future as venerable and vital as Yaya Qparung.

Used with permission

The Second Conversation between Smangus and the Bureau of Forestry

2007-05-31T22:59:00.000+08:00

Arranged by Wali and Lahuy
Translated by Shun-Ling Chen, SJD candidate, Harvard Law School

1. Field notes in Smangus

At 10:55 on Apr 30th morning, 2007. Eight people from the Zhu-Dong Station of Hsin-Chu Forestry District Office of the Bureau of Forestry, including Mr. Yu-Tsai Luo (羅玉財), came to Smangus and were spotted by villagers. Smangus villagers, Ikit, Masay, Amin, Sasan, Masa, Sangas and Wali had a conversation with them in front of the Smangus Visitor Center.

“We have to check the patrol box. It is something that we do every month. It does not mean anything more than that.” Luo claimed.

“People from the Bureau always seem to drive too fast, especially in the village,” Amin said.

“We’ve also read [the beech incident] from the news. Some officials of higher level will come over,” someone from the Bureau said.

“It is not necessary. We did not get any good response in headquarter of the Bureau. You will not sound any more convincing even if you come to Smangus and talk to us in person.” replied Amin.

“But we still need to communicate. Indigenous villages and the Bureau usually have different takes. We fear that what happened in this particular case will become a common one.

“We indigenous people need our innocence to be declared,” said Sasan.

“We’ll try to work toward this direction in the Court of Appeal,” said Luo.

“It is really unacceptable that our cleaning wind-fall trees are interpreted as larceny. If this dispute can be resolved, it will be good.” said Masay.

“We share the same goal.” someone from the Bureau claimed.

“This decision is totally disrespectful to indigenous peoples. We’ve had the idea of conservation for generations. We won’t cut the woods or hunt animals without limits. This is the environment where we live. We should manage our traditional territory following our ancestor’s way. Our ancestor has never chopped off all the trees, unlike what the Japanese or the KMT Government did when they first came,” said Masa.

Amin followed, “In the harsh times like this, please respect the village. In this atmosphere, please bear with the situation for some time. This incident is serious and has caused harm to the village. If you insist on going in, it might cause …(more tension) between the village and the Bureau. Please respect how the village thinks.

“We came with a mission. Letting two of us in would be enough. If we cannot sign the document [in the patrol box], we’ll have to write some reports to explain why we were not able to get things done. If so, this might have negative impacts on our future communication with the village,” insisted Luo.

Amin: Our chief and the head of this Lin (lowest administrative unit in the Local Government Law) are currently away and won’t be back until this evening. Villagers’ consensus is very clear. Please do respect the village and do not complicate the situation even more. The villagers feel more outraged. We (those who were at presence), however, are the ones that are more willing to communicate. Or perhaps we should communicate only until the village is willing to do so.

Masay:“If the new director comes, we’ll let him know this is how we deal with this”

Amin: “Those who sent to our village from the Bureau, they really drive too fast when they come. In our village pact we state the speed limit clearly. Your people seem to have ignored it. Please spread the words when you’re back, that not to speed when they drive in Smangus.

“We’ll definitely do so”, Luo said.

Amin: “The case is currently on trial. It is a harsh time. We’re judged guilty. We have to insist our take, and will not accept such judiciary result.

Luo: “They are two separate issues.”

Amin: “It is the Bureau who sued us. I don’t think it would be a separate issue in any case. We have already hurt by all this.”

“I meant that issue (the beech event) and entering Smangus to sign the document in the patrol box are different things. Last time I entered with the permission of the head of the Lin. We need to continue the communication with each other in the future, and live in peace with each other.” Luo said.

Ikit: “We still insist that you should not enter, now with a serious event like this. And look how heavy the punishment has been decided without reason. You’ve taken the beech away to sell somewhere else. We only took the remains, and now we’re criminals? Is this reasonable? So many damages have been made to this forest, and you guys are just wandering around here. If you’re really concerned about protecting the forest, why don’t you go in there and catch those bad guys?”

Wali: “I just want to know why you need to sign the document. If you just want to do it as a routine, it doesn’t seem to be important to me. If all you want is signatures, we can sign for you as well. But why do you want to go in there? You can say that’s your job, but we also have our jobs. If you insist that’s the reason why we have to let you in, we can also set a patrol box there and sign the document ourselves, or even set a patrol box in your Bureau and go in there and sign.”

Luo: “But the Bureau-administered land is in there!”

Ikit: “What do you mean by “Bureau- administered land’? That’s Smangus’s “traditional territory”. Are you still pretending that you don’t know about it? You come with so many people this time, and the issue is not even settled yet. Are you trying to incite some conflicts?”

“Don’t take it badly. … We’re heading back,” said Luo.

Sangus: “It is already a courtesy for us to let you Bureau people stay here. When we protest in the Bureau [Headquarter] in Taipei, we were sitting outside. It was your luck that I did not bring my son. If I did, I would have brought a knife with me. Now you’re here in my home, you can either apologize or say you want to go to the patrol box. But before the issue is settled, don’t you ever think about checking that patrol box again. Tell your supervisors to come and apologize now.”

Ikit: “You don’t need to go to the Giant Tree. We will protect it well. It will never fall.”

Amin: “Today we’ve sent out people to clean the area around the Giant Trees. We send our young people to clean the roads and to investigate and maintain the order of the forest every week. We are in the first term of our five-year Oyunm (inherent hunting field and traditional territory) Watch and Revitalization Project, which not only covers basic issue, but also leads to adjustments in the hunting and collecting practices. The Project prohibits collecting forest products and cutting woods. I think we have been making all the efforts, it’s not that we do not care about the environment.”

Ikit: “If the forest is been damaged, we’ll notify the Bureau.”

2. On the other end of the phone, Smangus members talked with the visitors from the Bureau:

At 10:55, on April 30, 2007, eight people from Zhu-Dong Station of Hsin-Chu Forestry District Office of the Bureau of Forestry, including Luo, were planning to enter Smangus for regular “patrol. Icyeh the chief, Batu and Yuraw the elders had a conversation with the Bureau people over a landline in the village.

“We’re only coming to sign the document,” said Luo, who kept making laughing sounds – hahaha – when he spoke.

“In the moment like this, don’t you enter our traditional territory to sign anything, and don’t try to enter ever,” said elder Batu.

3. Emphases Smangus wants to make:

　Smangus is not picking on the Bureau itself. But in the past years, the Bureau that represents the Government power in regulating forestry has been doing a very lousy job. (We will continue to tell stories about what the Bureau of Forestry and the Veteran’s Affair Commission have done in our traditional territory, so that the essence of their work, their attitude in carry out their work, the way they treat us, and our responses, can be understood and examined by more people.) This beech event is a public prosecution case, and is decided according to Section 4 and Section 6 of Article 52 in the Forestry Act. Can the Bureau claim that it has nothing to do with the decision? Don’t they have to be responsible? Are they not part of the Government?

We need to keep asking the higher authorities of the Bureau: why weren’t they present and involved in the negotiation in the three most important stages – the negotiation with the village (October14, 2005), investigations of the criminal case (four times in 2006) and the testimony in the lowest court (Feb 14th and Apr 4th of 2007)? After the case was indicted by the prosecutor, the Bureau only sent a rank-and-file officer, Mr. Zhi-Xien Yu (余智賢) from Xio-Laun Division of Zhu-Dong Station of Hsin-Chu Forestry District Office to represent the Bureau and testify. In the second time when Mr. Yu’s testified, we were astonished that the answer he gave most frequently was “I don’t really know.” How come someone who doesn’t know about anything is qualified to testify on behalf of the Government?

Under the Forestry Act, Article 15 (or the Section 4 of Article 15 in the amended Forestry Act), it also addresses: "In forests that are located in indigenous peoples' traditional territories, indigenous peoples may collect forest products according to their needs and customs. As for the area, kinds of products, time, whether there should be a recompense for the collected goods, or other regulations they should follow, the body overseeing forestry in the central government should consult the body overseeing indigenous affairs in the central government and they should jointly decide.” But in the first two negotiation stages, why didn't the testimonies given to the prosecutor from the Bureau ever refer to this article as an alternative way to solve the issue? And this has led to the decision made by Taiwan HsinChu District Court on April 18th - three villagers were imposed the declared crime of stealing the main product of national forests.

The whole Smangus village was outraged by the decision. Since the protest in Taipei on April 22, until today (May 2), Hsin-Chu Forestry District Office of the Bureau kept contacting villagers for a good talk. Batu the elder of the village replied on the phone: "What is it there for us to talk with you? In our negotiation in the Bureau (Headquarter) in Taipei, didn't you make it clear by that the decision has nothing to do with you? You people in the Hsin-Chu Forestry District Office kept calling to say that you want to have a conversation. There's no such need! If you want to talk with us, please write down what you want to talk about in words. We will surely be willing to read it word-by-word."

Smangus strongly urge the Administrative Yuan that they should better reduce the size of the Bureau. After all the waste of the tax for 62 years, what becomes of the mountains and forests in Taiwan? The overseeing body of natural resources in the central government should be reorganized. One premise for this reorganization is to recognize that: many indigenous communities are more capable of carrying out this task than the Bureau and National Park Administrations, because this is the place that breeds the life of our people. What we see with our eyes is not only forest resources, but many spiritual elements that exist in the universe of our forest. For most times, forests won't be protected only by slogans of forest conservation. Now we won't keep silent anymore. We will speak as the owner of the land. That is our land. We will protect the forests and streams of our tribe as their guardians. No one knows this environment better than those who live here. We, the people in Smangus, are capable of and determined (to protect the environment).

The Proclamation made on April 24, 2007 in regard to the Smagus Beech Event

2007-05-31T22:40:00.000+08:00

Written by Tayal Tribal Committee
Translated by Hsiao-Ching Sun and Shu-Chun Chang

Ginlhoyan Pspung Zyuwaw Tayal / Tayal Tribal Committee

Tayal has established Tayal Tribal Committee on December 10th, 2000. Tayal Tribal Committee strives for the fulfillment of tribal rights and autonomy, represents as the political entity of our tribal people, and exercises our tribal nature sovereignty in our tribal territory. Six hundreds of representatives from each Tayal villages assembled in Gogan Knyopan Tribe so called Luo-Fu Village, Fusing Township, Taoyuan County by national administration on Northern Cross-Island Highway, listened to Tayal Gaga, and declared that our tribal territory and lands would be handed down from our generations to generations. The upper course of Takoham River belongs to Mrqwang and Mknazi’s, which is part of our tribe’s traditional territory. Smangus belongs to Mrqwang’s the most upper course of river which is defined as Jian-Shih Township, Hsin-Chu County, Yufeng Village by The Republic of China Administration.

The Constitution of the Republic of China has established the regulation of indigenous rights according to their will to protect their rights. The Constitution of the Republic of China has enacted The Aboriginal Basic Law and according to the constitution, it admits the indigenous peoples’ rights of lands and natural resources.

Since the establishment of Republic of China, the Bureau of Forestry invades and destroys the ecological resources of indigenous forest, resulting in the contraction of the indigenous living space and the destruction of the communal culture rooted in the land. Originally we believed that the mistakes of former policies could be revised and improved in accordance with the political development towards democracy. However, the Bureau of Forestry nowadays still controls the natural resources belonging to the tribal land, makes the profit, and leaves the land wounded. What’s even worse, without viewing the issue from the indigenous standpoint, the Bureau of Forestry takes a step further and violates the living rights of the land-based indigene who are disadvantaged. The government ignores the existence of the law and the ethics of the administration.

Underneath is what Tayal Tribal Committee proclaims: Before the related laws and decrees have been legally adjusted and agreed upon by Mrqwang and all the local tribal men, our assembly considers the enforcement of the law by the Bureau of the Forestry illegal and ineffective. Tayal assembly refuses to admit its enactment and retains all the necessary measures to defend our community and our tribal men.

President: Masa Tawhuy

Reflect on the first court sentence for the windfall beech dispute

2007-05-29T23:56:00.000+08:00

(A native, Pisuy Silan)

The dispute between the people of Smangus and the Taiwan Forestry Bureau since last September has led to a political campaign which calls for fairness and respect in treating the indigenous peoples in Taiwan. Supporting the defendants in the lawsuit, people originally taking on this task were those who live in the community. Nevertheless, the campaign is growing and the advocates gradually include the nearby indigenous Tayal communities, then the whole Tayal tribe, and now social activists from diverse ethnic / cultural backgrounds.

The people of Smangus observed the traditional ceremony P’surux Btunux (setting up a stony alter to make covenant) on May 7, 2007. By doing so, they made a statement about their long history of residing at Smangus and the compatibility of living with the nature. They argued that history had endowed them the right to define, own, and manage their own traditional territory. This natural right, they claimed, should oversee the judiciaries of the countries, including that of the Republic of China. In this reason, although the latest sentence of the court did not turn out in favor to the defendants, they still argued for the defendants’ innocence -- On April 18, 2007, Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court announced the first sentence to each of the three defendants six months in imprisonment, fine of NT160,000 dollars, and two year deferral of imprisonment. The people of Smangus resented, rejecting to accept the result.

They explain that they, following the culture and the wisdom taught by the elders and their previous generations, live in a sustainable way in harmony with the ecological system and protect the natural resources in their own traditional territory. Facing the globalization of capitalistic individualism, the people of Smangus mean to preserve their traditionally collectivist lifestyle by organizing a co-op which carefully applies the plans of community development. The co-op distributes the resulting profit to all of the community members and finances the community youth’s educational scholarships. More, when natural disasters happened to make the only road linking the village with the world outside impassable, they took initiative to clean the path without sitting and waiting for the local government’s rescue. The people of Smangus thought that their spontaneity would lead the government to consider Smangus a model among the indigenous communities.

Surprisingly, the government agents did not appear to appreciate the community’s activism. Rather, through judicial intervention the local Forestry administrators charged the three people of the community larceny of stealing a stump of a windfall beech. Indifferent to the autonomy Smangus had showed, the administrators in fact acted in conflict with the vision posted by the Council of Indigenous Peoples, the central governmental agent that promoted the indigenous people’s community revival and worked in defining the communities’ traditional territories. Such negligence hurts the chance to give birth to any bill of right for the indigenous peoples. It gives no help except leaving the people reminiscence that they once could hunt and farm on their own lands.

An indigenous reporter Pisuy Masao recorded the conversation in court between the chief judge and the defendants on April 4, 2007. The conversation illustrated the great disparity between the judge and the defendants in terms of understanding the judicial laws vs. indigenous culture.

The judge: “ Are you saying that the beech was within your community’s traditional territory? Where and how large is the territory?” (The judge pondered for long as speculating that there was such a territory.)

One of the defendants tried to recall the location: “It starts from our village and extends to the Dabajian mountain.”

The judge: “I am asking about that of your village, not that of your tribal nation. I would like to ask another person ….. Can you indicate the location of the traditional territory?”

Another defendant answered “If I need to count the area precisely, although not having exactly measured it, I can give you my estimation – the area starts from our village, up and down to 800 meters, left to 5 kilometersj, and right to 12 kilometers.”

The judge frowned: “Can you raise any legal evidence to prove your statement? Did you ever register the territory to the government?”

A defendant replied: “Our governmental body is the Council of Indigenous Peoples. We are also making our own tribal map.”

Judge: “Your own tribal map?”

(The rest of the inquiry is skipped)

Because the Forestry administration had numerated and painted numbers on the woods, the act to take any part of a tree was judged as stealing country’s property. In addition, the Forestry Bureau through persecutor office’s indictment accused the defendants as joint offenders who violated Section 4 Article 52 of the Forestry Act. This could lead to the sentence of imprisonment ranging from six months to five years and fine ranging from two to five times, which was more serious than the fine to a single offender. On surface this sentence seemed to be legally valid and fair. However, the sentence based on the general provisions of the current judicature still ignored the fact that the indigenous peoples had survived along with and using the natural resources for thousands of years in Taiwan.

After hearing the sentence, Icyeh Sulung, the chief of Smangus, outside the court house expressed his indignation. He argued that indigenous peoples had begun to reside in Taiwan long before any political power as country was established. This case made the indigenous communities realize that the current government did not fully expect the indigenous peoples’ right. This issue showed that in the previous presidential election campaign, the candidates who proposed to value and protect the indigenous people’s ways of life said so only for obtaining ballots. The promise made by the current president Chen Shui-Bian to form a new partnership with indigenous peoples did not appear to be true.

In order to assure indigenous peoples’ right, the legislature passed the Aboriginal Basic Law in July, 2005. The time set for completing the amendment was three years. Now more than two years have elapsed. During the past two years, the right of the indigenous peoples in Taiwan was still neglected and even denounced. The instances can be seen in the “honey” dispute that happened to the Tsou tribe, the dispute regarding how the police did body search to some Taroko people at a national park, and recently the government’s inefficiency in preventing non-indigenous fishermen’s boats from interrupting the Tau nation’s flying fish festival. These instances raise questions whether or not the Aboriginal Basic Law can really protect the indigenous peoples. It is either worrisome that the Council of Indigenous Peoples, which should stand for the indigenous, do not seem to be able to resolve the issues efficiently.

P’surux Btunux (set up a stone marker to make covenant) is a sacred ceremony observed by the Tayal tribe. It serves the indigenous communities to define territories of hunting, farming, and residence. Centuries ago the people of Smangus migrated from the original place Pinsbkan toward the north. Then this ceremony was used to draw borders with the other communities. Not long ago, the chief of Smangus, Icyeh Sulung again led all the people of Smangus to observe this ceremony. It functioned as a solemn statement. It declared to the Forestry Bureau as well as the government of Taiwan that the people of Smangus had the right to claim their own territory, protect, and well manage the forest within it. Through the ceremony, the participants educated their own children that they made an oath to God and their ancestors that they determined to hold on this right.

Practicing the tradition, the people of Smangus not only have sent a strong message to the court and administration, arguing that the defendants who applied the decision of community assembly should not be sentenced as thieves, they also have advocated that indigenous peoples as humans own natural right to determine their own ways of life. When the majority of the people in Taiwan seem to only pay their attention on the political fights among the different parties, the voice of Smangus may sound humble. But in dignity it is a clear voice that calls for conscience and equality.

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

The Petition Statement of Smangus

2007-05-29T23:49:00.000+08:00

Guilty? NO!

Please publicly express your support for

the Not Guilty Plea of the Wind-fall Beech Event in Smangus

Statement: Smangus was indicted of larceny on account of the wind-fall beech event. However, the village does not accept the result of the first instance made by Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court, and insists on the rightness of its Tayal traditional customs, and the coherence with the spirit of the New-Partnership and the Aboriginal Basic Law that was issued by the President of Taiwan. Therefore, we are determined to go for the Not Guilty Plea.

「Rhiyal myan, hmwsa qeriq son sami！」Kmayal qu mrhuw Icyeh,「Iyayt nbah mstkung、msqara qu sinnusan inlungan！Nyux qu mshiyu mtasaw na Gaga Tayal, khanay ta nya Utux Kayal, prraw、slokah、phngyang qu Smangus！ Mhway simu kwara！」

“It is OUR land! Why call us thieves?” said Icyeh the chief, “And to the end will we fight with perseverance and with no fear. We firmly believe that all of our efforts will bring forth the realization of justice and truth. We pray that God will bless for this time, and I hope that the friends of Smangus will help us with your great strength. Thanks you very much!”

The History of the Event：

On September 2nd of the previous year (2005), the visit of typhoon Haitang caused the landslide on the only jointing roads, which was within our traditional territory. In order for students to go to school and in order to bring our lives back to normal, the village assembled a meeting and sent people to make the urgent repair. At that time, the beech was buried amongst the mound of the landslide. After the road repair, the villagers put the wood on the roadside, and had in mind the idea of bringing it back to the village someday to help create the village, which will add the glory of our village when it comes to tourism promotion.

On October 7th of that same year, while the wind-fall beech had been laid there for a month and seven more days, we were mad to find that the Forestry Bureau staff had sawn the fallen beech into pieces and transported them down to the plain. This was a bully manner of a burglar to take the wood without any notice to the native inhabitants. In spite of the upset, we endured the unfavorable situation quietly.

Observing the value of the tree remains, the village appointed the three people, including Amin, to transport it back. On their way back, they bumped into the chief of Hengshan branch, Hsin-Chu County Police Bureau, Taiwan and Hbun Tunan Police Station, who accused them against the Forestry Act, and arrested them on the charge of burglary. They received the result of the first instance on April 18th, 2007. The penalty shall be 6 months of imprisonment, the fine of NT$160, 000 for each person, and suspension of punishment for two years.

Smangus does everything in accordance with Tayal traditional law (Gaga) and universal ethics. Besides, we hold village conference to deal with public affairs on the basis of the Tribal Treaty. Smangus people have lived on this land for more then 20 generations. It is also our living here that protects the environment in some ways. That we make the best use of the woods and other natural resource is no doubt a right and proper thing. Why then does this deed leave on us a stigma of stealing? This is so beyond our comprehension.

No matter how you look at this event, the Forestry Bureau and the Police are viewing this case from the strictest angle. They didn’t regard it with Section 4, Article 15 of the Forestry Act, “If the forest is located in the traditional territory of aboriginal people, the aboriginal people may take forest products for their traditional living needs. The harvesting area, variety, time, paid/unpaid, and other rules should be decided by the central government agency along with the central government of the aboriginal people.” Instead, they didn’t do what they were supposed to do (help the village make repairs on the joint roads) and accused us with Article 52, “The penalty for burglary of primary forest products or forest by-products.” This is extremely unacceptable!

We are saddened by the unfair verdict of Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court. In order to claim our innocence and seek justice, we are determined to appeal to a higher court to fight to the very end and ask for the Not Guilty Plea. We will definitely fight it through. And we hope that those who chime with us would like to help us in a practical way.

You can help by your countersignature either as an individual or as a group/ organization. There are two things you can help:

1 Countersignature by ( individual or group)
For Individual
For Organization
View current results!!

2. You can write a letter in support of Smangus and have it sent to any of the following government departments:

Office of the President, Taiwan

Email (please go to): http://www.president.gov.tw/en/

Tel: 886-2-23113731
Address: No. 122, Sec. 1, Chungking Rd., Taipei, Taiwan

Executive Yuan, Taiwan

Email (please go to): http://www.ey.gov.tw/sp.asp?xdURL=mail/mail_en.asp&ctNode=210&mp=11

Tel: 886-2-33566500

Address: No. 1 Sec. 1, Jhongsiao E. Rd., Taipei City, 10058 Taiwan

The Forestry Bureau

Email: service@forest.gov.tw

Tel: 886-2-23515441

Address: No. 2, Sec. 1, Hangchou Rd., Taipei City, 10050, Taiwan

Council of Indigenous Peoples, Executive Yuan, Taiwan

Email of the Minister: minister@apc.gov.tw

Attn: Mr. Walis Perin (Tayal)

Tel: 886-2-25571600

Address: No.172, Sec. 2, Chongcing N. Rd., Datong District, Taipei City 103, Taiwan

Support for smangus:Rogelio Rodriguez's letter

2007-05-23T16:48:00.000+08:00

To whom it may concern:

I find it a true atrocity that innocent people are being incarcerated for a crime that does not exist in my eyes. The Tayal people in Smangus are being found guilty with out all the facts being looked at. The fact that the Taiwanese Government is taking such harsh actions over the removal of a tree that was actually taken down by the typhoon that hit he island is mockery of the laws that are in place.

The Smangus people have a long history in the island and have always relied on the resources that the land offers them. The Smangus people are full of traditions and beliefs that make up the history of Taiwan. The Smangus actually have the right to use the resources of the forest for their traditional practices; these rights are allowed under Section 4, Article 15 of the Forestry Act. I plead the Taiwanese Government to enforce the laws that are in place. The Smangus should be protected from being pursued by the local government over rights that they have.

I seriously hope that these letters of support will not fall on deaf ears. Please take the time to look into this situation and look into the laws that were created. The Smangus are a part of Taiwan and this makes me feel that they are being treated unfairly. If the Taiwanese Government treats its own people in this way, I can only imagine how bad a tourist my have it. These actions most then likely have already changed tourist decisions to visit such a great place like Taiwan. I hope that this issue will have a positive outcome for the Smangus and the people of Taiwan as a whole.

Thank you for your time

Rogelio Rodriguez

Support for smangus:Rebecca Thorp's letter

2007-05-23T16:45:00.000+08:00

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to show my support for the Smangus people in their fight against the wrongful guilty conviction in the event involving the fallen beech tree. Section 4 Article 15 of the Forestry Act gives the rights to the resources in the traditional territories of the Smangus to the Smangus people. The beech tree that fell from typhoon Haitang was within their traditional territory and, in accordance with Section 4 Article 15 of the Forestry Act, lawfully allowed to be collected by the Smangus people. Convicting the members of the Smangus people of larceny for harvesting what was rightfully theirs is wrong. The Smangus are only asking for the Taiwanese government to follow the same laws they abide by and to enforce them properly. Instead of acknowledging the resource as legally obtained by the Smangus, your government has concluded that they are in violation of Article 52.

Please reconsider the judgment you have made against the members of the Smangus people. The fallen beech tree was a resource rightfully theirs and they have committed no act of larceny.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Thorp

Student
San Jose State University

How Taipei is breaking promises to Aborigines

2007-05-23T16:33:00.000+08:00

Quote from http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/05/14/2003360824

By Huang Yi-yuan (黃驛淵)

Monday, May 14, 2007, Page 8The Chinese-language newspaper China Times reported that the Smanguscommunity of the Atayal Aboriginal tribe in Hsinchu County's Chien-shihTownship (尖石) refused to allow Forestry Bureau officials to observe atraditional ceremony expressing the tribe's sovereignty on May 7.

The refusal was sparked by an event two years earlier, in which tribemembers had taken dead logs from trees blown over during a typhoonback to their community for decorative purposes.

The bureau sued them for violating the Forestry Law (森林法) and theHsinchu District Court ruled that the removal of the logs constituted"larceny."

This astounding verdict has made citizens doubt whether the spirit of"multiculturalism" that the government professes is actually possible.

The residents of Smangus have always decided tribal matters byconsensus and through traditional tribal law.

For example, when the tribe made the decision to take the fallen logsback to the community, this action was seen as no different fromtaking food out of one's own refrigerator to cook.

If we closely analyze this issue in light of Taiwan's policy towardAborigines, their laws and similar policies in other countries, itbecomes clear that the government's handling of this incident did notconform to the spirit of multicultralism.

President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) signed an agreement called "A NewPartnership Between the Indigenous peoples and the Government ofTaiwan" with Aboriginal representatives on Orchid Island in 1999 whenhe was running for president.

He again acknowledged the agreement as president in 2002. Theannouncement of the Aboriginal Basic Law (原住民族基本法) in 2005 furtherconfirmed, in practical legal terms, that Aborigines have the right toself-governance.

The law clearly acknowledges that Aborigines have authority over theirland and natural resources. The articles within the law clearlystipulate that Aborigines may legally engage in non-profit activitieswithin their areas, including collecting wild vegetation, minerals,stone and other resources.

The Forestry Law also says that "If the forest is located in thetraditional territory of Aboriginal people, the Aboriginal people maytake forest products for their traditional living needs."

However, beginning with the Forestry Bureau's lawsuit over the logsall the way through to the court's ruling, the entire process hasrepeatedly highlighted the government's arrogance and ignorance inAboriginal matters. Moreover, the government has clearly ignoredAboriginal rights to self-governance and the spirit ofmulticulturalism.

How do other countries handle controversies between native land rightsand natural resources? The US has given native American tribes theright to manage natural resources on their reservations, includinglumber, water, fishing, hunting and minerals.

In Canada, beginning with the 1973 case of Calder vs. the Attorney-General of British Columbia and extending through the Delgamuukw vs.British Columbia case in 1997, the courts have repeatedly affirmedAborigine rights to self-governance and land use.

On the surface, the government has acknowledged the autonomy of thenation's Aborigines through laws and partnership agreements. So howcan it flip-flop and ignore the promises it has made?

And most of all, why should our Aboriginal friends trust thegovernment when it misuses its public authority in such an obviousmanner?

Huang Yi-yuan is a student at the Graduate Institute of Journalism atNational Taiwan University.

Translated by Marc Langer

Save the Smangus People

2007-05-22T14:44:00.000+08:00

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in regards to the wind-fall beech event that had occurred at Smangus and would like to extend my support for the Smangus community. Based on the information made available to me, the Forestry Bureau staff had cut the tree into pieces and removed of them, which was in village boundaries. When the village people tried to take the wood back to the village after it was transported, they were accused of burglary. How can it possibly make sense to charge these traditional people with burglary on something that originally was located in their territory? These people were only taking back what was originally theirs, which was taken away by the Forestry staff. Since that were the case, perhaps it could be considered the Forestry staff committed the burglary first. Had they not removed the tree, the village people would not have been able to take the pieces away.

The Smangus people who have been charged with this unthinkable crime should not only deny these charges, but defend their beliefs as well. These people have broken no laws, because they are being charged with a law that doesn't even apply to them to say the least. They were only taking back what was rightfully theirs. It plays a major role in sustaining their tourism they have. Furthermore, these people are charged with a crime, when Section 4 of Article 15 clearly states that aboriginal people may take forest products which promote their traditional living needs.

It is my hope that these charges can be reviewed and overturned. The Smangus people have resided there for many generations and many are outraged that this situation has come to this.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Lau

Student of San Jose State University , San Jose, California

Interview with Elder Masay

2007-05-22T14:29:00.001+08:00

Reprinted from Coolcould Forum: Who’s the Executioner? Smangus or the Forestry Bureau?
Written by Tzuyaya (Stringer journalist of the Coolcloud website)
Translated by Chie-Yu Hong

“We are far more qualified to protect the forest than the Forestry Bureau!” claimed former director-general of The Association for the Development of Atayal Smangus, Masay Sulong.

Masay stated that Taiwan's aerial images could reveal how those thick forests in Alishan and Cilan mountain areas have turned from green to bare due to over exploitation under the Forestry Bureau's jurisdiction. Nevertheless, Smangus still embraces dense forests, limpid creeks and towering giant trees, which demonstrate well the villagers' environmental sense.

Smangus has devoted to forest conservation for the practical concern of living with the environment. Though the people have protected not only the environment but also their homelands through forestation, their concerns come to serious conflicts with government departments. To illustrate, three villagers were charged with stealing by the Forestry Bureau for violating the Forestry Act; they were sentenced to six months in prison with two years of probation and fined NT$160,000 dollars each. However, they had only found a wind-fall beech from typhoon in the year before, while rushing to repair the damaged road, and attempted to carry the tree back to their village for reuse.

Masay sigh, saying that our government had been blind to the indigene's efforts for the environment. “Rather, our government values wind-fall and withered trees above all” he retorted.

“We've been thinking about how to preserve our mountains and our lands” said Masay. He remarked that the ancestors of indigenes had indeed ample environmental sense. They would, for example, build a retaining wall by laying stones after logging. They could understand the values of planting trees because they knew that Nature could run short of supply and trees could hold back mudflows. They left the animals for propagation in summer and did not hunt until celebrations in winter. They protected their rivers for clean water to drink.

Masay expressed his hope that our government could listen in patience to Smangus voices and work out an agreement through equal consultations to let the Smangus care for their own mountains and keep their cultural traditions. “Isn't it nice to respect each other?” said Maysay.

Maysay sighed gently and led me to the square in the village.

“This is my production named ‘La qi klokah.’ The term ‘La qi’ means a child, while ‘klokah’ means way to go. In other words, this name implies ‘Way to go, my child!” Masay pointed for me.

Taking a careful look, I discovered a path of foot prints carved quite neatly on the front right of this woodcarving. Masay addressed that they symbolized Smangus ancestors' tracks. At that time there was no outside force from our government to disturb the indigene lives; hence, though their ancestors had difficult days, they still stuck to their lives, nurtured offspring and survived with Nature.

“Right after then, here came the Japanese geta” said Masay. When the Japanese Government came to Taiwan, they banned facial tattooing and other traditions, for they did not understand indigenous cultural backgrounds. Masay pointed at the footprints between the geta and said to me, “Tayal people lost their pace, and culture began to break down.”

Masay continued, “Later, leather shoes and high heels ensued.” He described that after the government of the Republic of China settled down in Taiwan, domestic economy started to thrive and Tayal people sold their lands and children to improve their living standards. They drew big businesses to their villages all for their own good, not treasuring the lands from ancestors.

Masay went on to explain that he did not mean to accuse big businesses, but oftentimes they did not mind aboriginal way of living while exploiting and making profits vigorously; unfortunately, villagers could do nothing with these big businesses' coercion and bribery but selling lands one after another.

“If we do not appreciate the land that grows us, what else shall our culture depend upon?” said Masay. He hoped that Smangus children could strive hard to keep protecting the lands they inherited from ancestors, and walked in measured steps, just like the small feet on the left of the woodcarving.

“La qi klokah!”

To The Taiwanese Government Officials:

2007-05-21T00:17:00.000+08:00

I urge the Taiwanese Government to reconsider the crimes that have been put forth on the Smangus people. The verdict is short-sided with only one perspective. The legalities alone are unjust. Land rights were guaranteed to the Smangus. Under section 4, article 15 of the Forestry Act, the Smangus was given the rights to any resource that their territory provided for traditional uses. However, the Taiwanese Government did not carry out their agreement. When the time came for the Smangus to utilize wood materials for rebuilding their village for repairs, the Government penalized the Smangus.

When reading about the Smangus people and their situation with their land rights, my heart sank. The Smangus are not asking for much. They just want to live in their ancestral lands in peace like they were promised. Instead of the Smangus being punished for trying to rebuild their village, they should be encouraged because they are an important part of Taiwan. It is necessary to maintain and uphold the native Taiwanese people and their traditions not only as a part of the history and magnificence of Taiwan, but to able to share those traditions with the entire world. Taiwan should be proud of the Smangus and all the efforts being made to keep their culture alive.

Please, take a step back and think of the impacts that can be made if the Smangus are found guilty. Again, it is everyone's responsibility to ensure the success of aboriginal peoples, such as the Smangus. They have given up so much, so let's all give back to the original people of the lands.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Melissa Keasey

Student of San Jose State University, California

Concerns for the Smangus people...

2007-05-16T11:04:00.000+08:00

To whom it may concern:

I find it truly sad that such innocent people are being accused of a "crime" when they really did nothing wrong. What seems to be an act of burglary from your perspective should be further investigated and considered from another standpoint.

The Smangus people have been living on this land for a significant amount of years and have always acted as well-intentioned people and obeyed all of the laws. Unfortunately, they are now left helpless in a situation where they are observed as "thieves." The remains that were taken were a part of the aboriginal people's territory, which gives them the right to keep for traditional living needs (in respect to Section 4, Article 15 of the Forestry Act).

I feel that this situation is based on a biased perspective and will only prevail due to lies and false beliefs. These people should not be punished for their actions and have already proven innocence with the support of the Forestry Act. To accuse these people of something that so out of line is like disregarding several generations of significant aboriginal history. If these people are charged guilty, then I think its time to challenge the effectiveness of this legal system.

I hope that this case will be based on a fair judgment and that the Smangus people and Taiwan authorities can come to an understanding.

Thank you for your time.

Paul Bautista

Student of San Jose State University, California

Support for the people of Smangus by Dr. Jon Corbett

2007-05-14T00:19:00.000+08:00

I first visited Smangus in 2005. Rarely in my travels have I encountered such hospitable, warm and generous people. I remember with great joy evenings by the fire eating crushed millet and wild honey, singing songs and laughing together.

To hear about their current predicament deeply concerns me. I would like to offer my support for the Smangus people in battling the apparent injustice of this incident.

I urgently call upon the Taiwanese government to reconsider their hasty actions in the manner in which they are treating the people of Smangus. It is the culture, spirit and hope embodied in these people (as well as members of all 12 Indigenous Tribes throughout the island) that contribute to making Taiwan such a diverse and resilient state. Please do not undermine this for the sake of bureaucratic rhetoric.

Jon Corbett, PhD.

Assistant ProfessorCommunity,
Culture and Global Studies,
University of British Columbia-Okanagan,3333
University Way,Kelowna,
B.C., Canada, V1Y 6A2

Smangus and Smangus Action Alliance News

2007-05-09T15:31:00.000+08:00

Who are the thieves? Who actually protect the forest?

Written by Smangus & Smangus Action Alliance
Translated by Tony Chu, Taiwanese/American Fellowship Presbyterian church in New Jersey, USA

On May 7th , the people of Smangus will observe Smi Kei, (bury stone to make covenant) the traditional ceremony to declare the right of managing the forest in the territory of indigenous community and reject the policing from the national forestry administration

Applying the community assembly’s consensus to transport a stump of a wind-fall beech back to their own village in order to do landscaping, the previous year in September three men from Smangus, a Tayal indigenous community, were accused of larceny by the Forestry Bureau. They were indicted by Taiwan Hsin Chu District Court. On April 18 this year the court sentenced each of the three men 6 months in imprisonment or to convert the imprisonment into fine for NT$160,000 dollars. Opposing the sentence, Smangus and several Tayal people together protested to the Forestry Bureau. After 4 hours of negotiation, the talk between the Tayal people and the Forestry Bureau ended in a rupture.

At 11:00 On May 7th morning, abiding by the Tayal law Gaga and the Aboriginal Basic Law, Smangus, the Mrqwang group of Tayal nation, will observe the traditional ceremony Smi Kei (bury stone to make covenant) at Bridge No.2 in Smangus. By so doing, we the people of Smangus declare the right of managing the forest in the territory of indigenous community and act to show determination of upholding our own sovereignty. Appealing to clean the stigma for the charge of larceny against us, we strive to claim our own right and responsibility of living alone with the nature and protecting the precious land and forest of Taiwan.

We demand this country to fulfill the promise of establishing a new partnership between the indigenous peoples and the government of Taiwan. We also demand the government to observe the Aboriginal Basic Law passed through legislation in year 2003 by recognizing the right that we own the traditional territory of indigenous community and our management over the forest and the land within it.

Time: 11:00 A.M., May, 7, 2007
Place: God’s village Smangus – Bridge No.2 Smangus, Jien-Shih Township, Hsin Chu County, Taiwan

Coordinator: (Mr.) Batu Icyeh 886-911-257093
Executive Officer: (Mr.) Omi Wilang 886-910-024675
Public Relation: (Mr.) Lahuy Icyeh 0912-238070 / (Ms.) Ching-Wen Kuo 886922-884979
Sponsors: Smangus & Smangus Action Alliance
Original Post: Blog “Taiwan’s Indigenous Community—Smangus Battles for the Unfair Trial” http://smangus.blogspot.com/

Declaration of Indigenous Land Rights

2007-05-05T23:25:00.000+08:00

Original Text written by Neqo Soqluman、Lahuy Icyeh (graduate students of Providence University, Taiwan)

Translated by Class of Contemporary Taiwanese Society

Department of Humanities and Social Science

National Chiao Tung University

People define the land, and the land defines the people. The Tayal inherent territory and natural sovereignty are the very foundation of Tayal culture. Therefore, the Tayal people declare that we have the full sovereignty, control and management over our ancestral lands.

To this day, the Tayal people—individuals and the village—have never by any means given up our ownership and use of our ancestral lands! That is to say we have never lost the rights to our traditional territory. This land has always been ours. For this reason, the Tayal people have the inherent rights to enjoy and manage our territory such as through agricultural cultivation, wild craft gathering, hunting, and current tourism development. This is our territorial heritage.

The state intervention is in fact an intrusion and offense to the Tayal subjectivity and sovereignty, which is an extreme example of the State’s brutality and oppression. How can the court prosecute the landowners as “thievery” when we simply use things from our own land? Therefore, in the premise of asserting our traditional territory and natural sovereignty, we demand that every form of state intervention be withdrawn from our land.

If the state claims that we do not have the land rights, please give concrete evidence to support such accusation. Or, please explain how the state acquired this land in the first place? And when did the Tayal people publicly announced that we give up our inherent traditional territory and natural rights?

Support from around the world: Dr. Teresa Tao's support for Smangus people

2007-05-03T18:47:00.000+08:00

I would like to support Smangus people as a lecturer in the Department of Geography at University of Toronto, Canada by adding the following message. Please provide only my English name. Thanks

Teresa
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A letter to Taiwanese Authorities:

I am a lecturer in geography at University of Toronto, Canada and one of the authors of "Guidelines for Tourism in Parks and Protected Areas of East Asia", published by IUCN – The World Conservation Union. My specialization is sustainable tourism development and resource management in indigenous communities. I have worked with Smangus people in 2004 on ecotourism development.

I would like to join Dr. Jeanine Pfeiffer, Dr. William T. Hipwell, and Dr. Kelly Bannister to add my support to the villagers' request of dropping the adjudication of the first instance made by Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court.

In order to effectively manage mountain forest o n an extensive scale, Forestry Bureau needs the aid and human resources of local indigenous communities who are born and brought up there and familiar with mountain forests and topography . It is the time to establish a mutually beneficial and respectful partnership with local indigenous communities .

The community began the planning and development of ecotourism more than ten years ago. Their interpretation program of local natural and cultural features and conservation concepts has changed knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour of tourists in pro-environmental way. The tourism related activities in the community have been sustainably managed in way of supporting conservation and providing quality tourism. Full local participation and money generated has been evenly distributed within the community under their traditional culture Gaga (communal mechanism). As a result, it was chosen as the model tribal community by the Council of Indigenous People, Execurive Yuan. If this event was not handled properly, it would jeopardize other tribes ' confidence to the committment made by Chen's government of establishing a new parternship with indigenous communities in Taiwan.

Sincerely,Dr. Teresa Tao
Department of Geography
University of Toronto
Canada

What do you charge us with?

2007-05-03T01:43:00.000+08:00

April 24th, 2007

Narrated by Amin, an elder of Smangus
Translated by Hsin-Hsin Liu
Arranged by Nequo Soqluman

I am Amin, the director-general of The Association for the Development of Atayal Smangus na Kalan, and a presbrtery in church as well. I don’t have a diploma higher than elementary education. Since I was a child, I have spent all my lifetime in Smangus, running around the mountains every day. Smangus is my home, and my village, where my families, my friends live. Moreover, it is the place my children were born and brought up.

To my understanding, it is only the shared tribal conventions and values that I know and respect. I know very little about the state law. I will obey the court order if they provide credible reasons. But so far I still believe I did not do anything wrong. From the viewpoint of my community, this is a very weird situation. The event does not make any sense at all, and I really don’t understand where we went wrong. Why should I be put into jail and get fined just because I took things in my house? Our living space is compressed and we don’t have much freedom. Even the court is not on our side. I have a question, “Do we ever have a right to live?” Indeed I can not understand why it is a crime to take the wood on our own land, which has always practiced since our childhood. They (the Forestry Bureau) have chopped down all the trees in the mountains but they are not charged. Besides, we do everything with our clear conscience, and never break the natural laws, that is, in Han people’s words; we never violate the law of eco-protection. Moreover, in fact, the beech DID fall down by itself because of the typhoon. Who will have stolen it that way if they meant to? During those days, we suffered from the landslide and the blocked traffic. Our children could not make their way to school. Therefore, we had to use our excavator and clear the roads. God knows how long it would take us to wait till the Forestry Bureau comes to help! They should have paid us for all the above-mentioned work instead. So we dealt with it on our own, and put the beech, aside of the road and planned to use it for the purpose of our village image. Our community is a hot touring spot where many tourists will come. If we meant to commit a crime, we wouldn’t have bothered to lay the beech aside for more than a month, instead of taking it home while solving the road block. By the time when we decided to take it, we found nothing remained but branches. Other parts had already been taken away by the Forest Bureau. They are the thieves who showed not a tiny respect to our village. My people and I insist to defend Smangus. We are innocent. We will never admit the offence of larceny to the Forest Bureau. I believe this is our right as a human!

** Added by Amin on April 28th, 2007

God has given this land for years and many Smangus people have been born on this land. We shall not be stumbled by the sentence of the first instance this time, and shall continue to manage this traditional territory that our ancestors have left to us. I persevered with my belief and will fight for it. I will let all of our indigenous friends know hear the voice of Smangus, which is, “Defend our land, our traditional territory and the spirit of our conventions. If I admit the crime, I will lose the most essential dignity and have the spirit of my village’s conference trampled on my feet.” I give my many thanks to all the friends who care for this event. May God bless you! Please continue to keep us in your prayer. Peace to all of you!

Support from around the world: Dr. Geoffrey Wall's incoming letter!

2007-05-02T02:17:00.000+08:00

Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 6:29 AM
Subject: Smangus

To Whom It May Concern

Various colleagues have expressed concern to me about the current situation in Smangus. Circumstances (I am currently in an airport awaiting a flight from North America to Europe to give a keynote address on sustainable development at an international conference) prevent me from accessing detailed information on the Smangus situation as well from preparing an articulate message. However, if what I have been told is correct - that individuals are to be punished severely for using a windfall resulting from typhoon damage on land within their territory - I would urge reconsideration of the severe sanctions that are being applied and a reopening of dialogue. Regardless of the rights of the case, I suggest that imposition of severe sanctions may do more damage than good, harming relationships between aboriginal peoples and mainstream society. As someone who has worked with aboriginal people in many parts of the world, including Taiwan, and have visited Smangus, I suggest a careful reconsideration of the case may be merited and that it may be that the "heavy hand of the law" is not always the best way to deal with such siruations.

Dr. Geoffrey Wall
Faculty of Envoronmental Studies
University of Waterloo Waterloo,
Ontario N2L 3G1
Canada

The Dialogue between Smangus and the Bureau of Forestry April 24th, 2007

2007-05-01T17:39:00.000+08:00

Written by Smangus Action Alliance
Translated by Chien-Yi Chiang-Lin, Chun-Man Li, Hsiao-Wei Cheng, Ren-Pin Wu, and Ti-Yang Shih, students form National Sun Yat-Sen University

Today, Smangus presented a petition to the Bureau of Forestry, protesting its inappropriate handling of the wind-fall wood event and asked the Bureau to apologize for and correct their accusation of larceny. The Bureau of Forestry allowed only ten petition representatives to enter the venue (led by Omi Wilang of Tayal Presbytery) to talk with Hung-Chih Yang (楊泓志), head of Forest Administration Division as the deputy of the Director-General of the Bureau.. No media was there at that time.

(People of Smangus began their march from their village to the Bureau of Forestry in early morning to fight for tribal sovereignty. People were few but their spirit was high!)

In the first place, one of the two parties didn’t approve of the presence of media. On this account, we compromised to have whole-course sound-recording. Then, after it was confirmed that Division Head Yang could accept the plea statement from the representatives on behalf of the Director-General of the Bureau, the media took the photograph and left the venue.

The stands of the both parties are listed out from the five major petitions for The Bureau of Forestry as follows:

A.The Bureau of Forestry shall apologize for stigmatizing Smangus with charges of larceny.

The Bureau: The Forest Bureau did not stigmatize Smangus with charges of larceny. It was but the verdict made by the judge. The Bureau does not need to apologize.
Smangus: If the Bureau of Forestry did not offer the testimony against the three people of Smangus, how would they have been charged with larceny?

B.The Bureau of Forestry shall clarify the truth and bring the corrections to the court.

The Bureau of Forestry: We had been aware of Smangus people’s cleaning the wind-fall beech, but we could not provide any corrections voluntarily to the court. Smangus, however, can appeal to the higher court. If the court arraign for the crew of The Bureau of Forestry, we would offer supplementary corrections.
Smangus: If the Bureau did not explicitly admit that they would not treat the event as an offence of larceny, is it possible that you would further offer another testimony counting against Smangus?

※Obviously, the two sides could not reach any agreement on the above two petitions. Therefore,we moved on to discuss the latter three points as the second main issue. We would go back to previous part after that.

(Icyeh the wise chief cried out, “Why don’t you just put all of us behind the bars?”)

C. the Bureau of Forestry shall agree to observe the Aboriginal Basic Law and respect the local indigenous people’s rights in their territory.

D. With regard to everything concerning the indigenous traditional territory, the Forestry Bureau shall discuss with the indigenous communities and villages for the management regulations.

E. The Forestry Bureau shall amend the law where the Forestry Act contradicts the Aboriginal Basic Law.

The Bureau of Forestry explained the Section 4, Article 15 of The Forestry Act that “if the forest is located in the traditional territory of aboriginal people, the aboriginal people may take forest products for their traditional living needs. The harvesting area, variety, time, paid/unpaid, and other rules should be decided by the central government agency along with the Council of Indigenous peoples’ Affair. However, the details of the management regulations of the law, such as a clear content of traditional territory and customs, are not yet decided. They have to be decided by the central government departments including Council of Indigenous Peoples’ Affairs.

Dr. Yih-Ren Lin suggested that it was the representatives’ agreement that the Bureau of Forestry should admit that the Bureau does not fully understand that complexities of the ways Forestry Act takes into account the spirit of indigenous traditional territory and custom. For that reason, the Forestry Bureau should not consider this case an offense of larceny before the court.

Meeting Adjourned.
After the meeting, the Bureau of Forestry issued a written statement as follows: “We realize that Smangus could consider this wind-fall beech case with the spirit of Article 15 of the Forestry Act. Therefore, when you appeal to a higher court, our staff could help clarify your thinking.” Dr. Yih-Ren Lin later explained that he had already conceded in his suggestion, but the statement from the Bureau of Forestry was just in a diametrical position.

A consensus has not been reached and the gap between both parties has been further increased. At last, Icyeh, the Smangus Chief expressed his gratitude and said “Thank you for the long and vehement discussions today. Since we can not get a bona fide response from the Bureau of Forestry, we will call an end to our meeting here.”

(The dialogue failed. The action team held another meeting to discuss the strategy for the next move. We pray to God to give us wisdom and power.)

WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS WHY A LOG OF BEECH TREE WAS AT ROADSIDE -- elder Batu's word from heart.

2007-04-30T17:31:00.000+08:00

Note from translator Tonyc: I live in New Jersey, USA and try to help raise the publicity of this issue. I try to capture the original essence of elder Batu's disclosure by coordinating the usages of different languages. Welcome to give correction if any place in the translation is not authentic.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"What I want to say is why a log of beech tree was at roadside. For 26 years, the Forestry Bureau has been in partnership with some business people who casually develop roads in the bamboo woods, the area of about 0.97 square kilometer, where this event happened. The development has seriously damaged the land our ancestors gave us. We feel resentful and sad!" (see picture 1: roads are casually built for cutting bamboos) --Batu (Tribal assembly -- Stated clerk)

What I want to say is why a log of beech tree was at roadside. This beech tree event has been going on for almost 2 years. I clearly know about how it progresses.. 　　

In about 1981 the Forestry Bureau "Sold the bamboos our ancestors Mrgwang had grown to business people." Then the business people built a road toward Smagus. At the same time, for expanding the space to grow more bamboos, the officials colluded with the business people to hire some labors form other villages. They had cut down all the trees growing among the bamboos for 5 years. Moreover, " For transporting the bamboos cut, the business people recklessly opened and built roads." This destroyed forestry and the ecological system originally in balance. As a result, now the foundation of the road through which people in Smagus link with the world outside is for 5km~7km sliding down from slope every year. 　　

About the trees cut down, "those identified valuable were all transported out. The others valueless were left to rot in the bamboo woods." I felt resentful and sad as seeing this act. Because being abused in this way, the place where the beech tree grew could not stand torrential rain. In August 31, 2005, when typhoon Feria swayed, this beech tree fell with the mud and rocks sliding down to roadside. We can see picture 2 (picture 2: Fallen beech event -- the scene of collapsed landscape)

　　For "our own people's living and students' commute between home and the school, the tribal assembly agreed to send 4 delegates to examine the road condition. " At that time the delegates did see the beech tree that blocked the road was covered by mud and rocks. "At that night when they came back to join the tribal assembly, the proposition to move this tree back to our village for the use of landscaping was raised." In clearing the road blocked, we moved this beech tree to roadside. After one month and seven days, the staff of forestry administration came to cut the tree into a few logs and transported them away, only leaving the stump.

　　In 2005, Oct. 8, when visiting the spot I saw the trunk of the beech tree gone. Right after my returning the assembly called meeting immediately and discussed that we had to take the root part of the stump back to be used for tribal landscaping.

　　 In 2005, Oct. 14, the assembly dispatched 3 people to move the stump back to the village. On the way back they were encountered by the branch office head of Heng-Shan and two policemen. They stopped and on site searched the 3 people and also called the local police and the forestry administration to visit our village. The officers demanded the 3 people to be formally interrogated. Right then we did not concede to the request. Not until at about 10 o'clock that night both sides reached consensus that " the three people would be questioned only for the record and nothing more!" So the 3 people went with the officers. However, the result became totally out of our expectation after the interrogation.

　 Soon, we received the warrant from court. Following that it was the first and the second investigations. In the civil court, the prosecutor raised bargain, saying that " why not just to admit guilty. Each of the three pays fine of 10,000 New Taiwan dollars and then this thing will trouble you no more."

　　But we as a tribe argue "Since not committing any crime, why do we need to admit guilty? Can only 10,000 dollars buy the right of our tribe?" We continued to appeal for not guilty.

　　At the third appearance in court, a lot of the tone and the words the judge questioned I could not agree to. For example, the judge asked the three defendants : "Do you have any opposition to the two witnesses' testimony? Please state your stance." The three defendants did not respond, because "they did not understand what the judge meant at all." What Elder Amin stated was his own opinion regardless of the testimony. The judge asked Amin again: "Do you have any opposition to the witnesses' testimony? You need to state your opinion." Elder Amin still presented his own opinion about the fact. After that he did not know how to say further. So he stopped. The judge asked the witnesses to leave. The silence of the three defendants did not mean that they fully agreed to the witnesses' words. In fact, we did not know whatever the exact meaning of the judge's inquiry.

　　The judge questioned again : "The stump was away from the village for 12 kilometers (the direct distance is about 2.5 kilometers), why did you go so far to take it?" On this the judge did not realize our aboriginal people's way of life. The road is the one we have been using. We have the right to take and use the bamboos and woods fallen on the way. There was not such a path and therefore we were only able to pick up those stuff within 5 kilometers to be the material for house building and for building fire for heat. Now the situation has changed. There has been a road for cars to go through. Life gets much easier. "What the judge said was not that bad. It was simply because he did not understand the life in the mountain. When having time, he is welcome to have field trips to the villages in order to understand the life of the aboriginal people, OK?"

　　We always live in highland and tie with the mountains and forest. Any tree / log fallen on the road we will pick up and use to the most without a waste, such as for building fire to keep family warm or for house improvement. Our people really feel hard understanding the law of the Republic of China. There are many points problematic in the testimony. I sat in the court but was not allowed and not able to say anything for the defendants.

　　 In 2007, April 18, the result of the first verdict : "Each of the defendants is sentenced to 6 months in jail, fined New Taiwan dollars 160,000, and given a reprieve for 2 years." The result angered our people and drove us to protest at the Forestry Bureau of the Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan in Taipei.

　　 In this controversy we are rational. We would like to expose this unjust regard to us to the public. Spending 4 hours on the negotiation with no positive response from the other side, our efforts were in vain. When back to the village we will be discussing about how to go on on this issue. For upholding the right of aborigines, we will hold up our ground without compromise! At this moment we need support from all our friends to escort our way. Similar to the day in April, 22, when we protested in Taipei, our Mrhua (chief) Icyeh revealed determination -- " We will appeal against the judge's decision !"

Our tribal village -- Smagnus' resolution:

1. We have been living in Taiwan for thousands of years. For only 62 years the law of the Republic of China has been applied. We do not give nor sell the land our ancestors endowed us to the country. This is the fact, isn't it? Why can the plaintiff pose the land entitlement to oppress our tribe / nation? Was this land entitlement stolen from us? Or was it made up anyway? We cannot accept the current situation! The government please be conscientious and acquit our three defendants.

2. The people of Smagus are solid. For a decade our work for building our village has been apparent. This achievement matches how we have been establishing Taiwan called home. The outcome we present yields the visitors to experience and understand our culture and history. When we work on this wholeheartedly, what we have done in this beech tree event is accused of stealing. How could this be just?

3. I am very disappointed about the attitude the government officials keep for administration. For achieving good performances in face value, they by all means take advantage of us the local. Is it a fact that our society is on the way of moral deterioration?

4. Since long before we the people of tribal village Smagus have been protesting to the Forestry Bureau. This event again alerts us that we have to tightly hold on the land our ancestors gave us and should never give it up.

5. As appealing to the higher court, altogether our village people will attend the court. This is not just the personal business of the 3 defendants. If accused of, we require the judges to regard us people of Smagus all as one body.

6. As long as we shall live, do not belittle Tayal!

Batu Icyeh 2006.04.28 morning

Smangus friends need your help‎ !!by Dr. Jeanine Pfeiffer(Science and Society Program, University of California at Davis)

2007-04-30T17:27:00.000+08:00

To the Taiwanese Authorities:

It is of great concern that I, and my colleagues at UC Davis, hear of the gravely misinformed policies and irresponsible actions of the Hsinchu Forest District Office and the Forestry Bureau towards members of the Tayal/Smangus community.

The traditional rights of Native communities such as the Tayal in Smangus over their ancestral lands - and the biological diversity within those ancestral lands - are internationally recognized by academics and agencies familiar with indigenous history, culture, and law.

The survival of an indigenous community such as the Tayal is deeply connected with their ancestral lands: to deny, or to undermine their biocultural heritage is a very short-sighted policy. A wiser policy would recognize and protect aboriginal cultural groups -including the Tayal - because Native cultural groups are what make the Hsinchu Forest District a unique and culturally rich region.

When I visited Taiwan in December 2006, and traveled to the Hsinchu forest, I was greatly impressed with the sophistication of the cultural and ecological tourism programs offered by the Tayal/Smangus communities, and by other aboriginal groups in the district. It gives me great sorrow to hear that these programs are threatened by the Taiwanese governments.

A well-educated and just Taiwanese government would support the Tayal and their traditional rights, in order to ensure the future political, social, cultural, and economic sustainability and prosperity of the Hsinchu Forest Region. Instead of fighting over one tree, let us all cooperate to protect the trees, the forest, and - most especially - the aboriginal peoples whose lives are so deeply connected with the forest.

Dr. Jeanine Pfeiffer

Science and Society Program, University of California at Davis

Dr. Kelly Bannister and Dr. Kerry R. Foresman's Incoming letter

2007-04-30T15:00:00.000+08:00

By Dr. Kelly Bannister :

Adjunct Professor,

School of Environmental Studies

University of Victoria, BC ,Canada.

I am saddened to learn about this situation with the Smangus community andI am writing to add my support to the villagers' request to be granted a"not guilty" plea. In this email, am speaking as a Board member and Chairof the Ethics Committe of the International Society of Ethnobiology. Frommy personal and professional interactions with people of Smangus and withthe Taiwan universitiy and ngo colleagues copied on this email, I knowthere is great integrity in all your work and you have always maintainedand striven for highly respectful and ethical standards in yourrelationship with Indigenous peoples, government and the local andinternational scientific communities. Indeed, your large delegation fromTaiwan last November made a tremendous contribution to developing a newCode of Ethics for the International Society of Ethnobiology and ensuringits translation to Chinese. See http://ise.arts.ubc.ca/ethics.html

I cannot believe that Smangus villers would purposely act unethically and illegally. There appears to be a logical explanation for taking thecontroversial windfall for their use, and indeed their rationale andconduct seems reasonable under the circumstances. I strongly urgeofficials to accept the "not guilty plea" and use this situtation as apostive opportunity to strengthen communications between government andvilligers and, if needed, develop an agreed protocol for if such asituation arises in future so that all parties can interact respectfully.I have had great admiration for the Taiwan government in supportingTaiwan's Indigenous peoples in the recent years. I hope my admiration cancontinue and not to be diminished by the outcome of this troubling event.

Sincerely,Kelly Bannister

*******************************
Kelly Bannister, M.Sc., Ph.D.Director,
POLIS Project on Ecological Governance
Adjunct Professor, School of Environmental Studies
University of Victoria

Address:
PO Box 3050, University House 4
University of Victoria
Victoria, BC V8W 3R4

tel:472-5016
fax:472-5060
website: www.polisproject.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Dr. Kerry Foresman:

Professor of Biology and Wildlife Biology
Division of Biological Sciences
The University of Montana

http://www.umt.edu/oip/factravelresearch/foresman.htm

I am very sorry to hear that this event has occurred and that these individuals are being prosecuted. I would be glad to add my name to thosewho protest this prosecution. The last time I was in Smangus Lahwy videotaped me speaking about the cypress trees and the villagers reverence forthese forests. Though this doesn't deal specifically with Zelkova I did talkabout the importance of these forests to the villagers and it would seemappropriate for my talk to be posted if Lahwy still has this video. I can'tread any of the postings on this web site since they are all in Chinese; isan English version available?

It is very nice to hear from you even though it is about a problem likethis. Please keep me informed about this case. I think about everyone often.

Kerry R. Foresman
Professor of Biology and Wildlife Biology
Division of Biological Sciences
The University of Montana
Missoula, MT 59812 406-243-4492

Confrontation with the Bureau of Forestry

2007-04-29T19:17:00.000+08:00

The day to present the petitions, April 24th, 2007

On April 24th, 2007, the Smangus went out to protest, presenting our five major petitions as below:

Five Major Petitions

1.The Forestry Bureau shall apologize for stigmatizing Smangus with charges of larceny.

2. The Forestry Bureau shall clarify the truth and bring the corrections to the court.

3. The Forestry Bureau shall agree to observe the Aboriginal Basic Law and respect our rights to our indigenous territory.

4. With regard to everything concerning the indigenous traditional territory, the Forestry Bureau shall discuss with the indigenous communities and villages for the management regulations.

5. The Forestry Bureau shall amend the law where the Forestry Act where it contradicts the Aboriginal Basic Law.

Arr. by Ruei-Ling Chen
Trans. by Yi-Ling Huang

After a nearly 4-hour dialogue… The Forestry Bureau's Reply:

2007-04-29T19:12:00.000+08:00

The Forestry Bureau's Reply:

According to the Section 4, Article 15 of The Forestry Act “ the forest is located in the traditional territory of aboriginal people, the aboriginal people may take forest products for their traditional living needs. The harvesting area, variety, time, paid/unpaid, and other rules should be decided by the central government agency along with the Council of Indigenous peoples'Affair. However the details of the management regulations of the law, such as a clear content of traditional territory and customs, are not yet decided. It has to be decided by the central government departments including Council of Indigenous Peoples'Affairs. Therefore, we don't need to apologize! Besides, the Verdict is made by the Judge, not by the Bureau.

The Smangus Representatives (ten people including village chief, key villagers, Tayal leaders, and the scholars) responded:

Dr. Yih-Ren Lin of Providence University, on behalf of the Smangus, made an effort to summarize a nearly 4- hour dialogue between both sides and, suggested that,

It is the representatives’ agreement that the Bureau of Forestry should admit that the Bureau does not fully understand that complexities of the ways Forestry Act takes into account the spirit of indigenous traditional territory and custom. For that reason, the Forestry Bureau should not consider this case an offense of larceny before the court.

After the Forestry Bureau requested instructions from higher authorities, they came back to the conclusion in written words. “We realize that Smangus could consider this wind-fall beech case with the spirit of Article 15 of the Forestry Act. Therefore, when you appeal to a higher court, our staff could help clarify your thinking.”

However, the Bureau did not clearly express their respect and consent to the spirit of Article 15, but acknowledged the Smangus peoples'understanding only. After a discussion amongst Smangus representatives, Chief Icyeh called an end to the dialogue. The representatives left the meeting room and announced to the villagers and concerned people in front of the Bureau building, “No Consensus”, and vowed to fight to the end.

After the confrontation with the Forestry Bureau, Reverend Atung closed the meeting of Smangus Action Alliance with a prayer, believing that whatever the outcome is, we will fight for the good cause.

For more information in Chinese, please go to http://blog.yam.com/smangus
For more information in English, please go to http://smangus.blogspot.com/

We need YOU to help our Smangus friends to ask for the respect and rights that they deserve!!!

If you are willing to help in any way, please leave your message on the above blog sites. We will contact you via telephone or email.

Original Texts Written by Lahuy Icyeh
Arranged by Ruei-Ling Chen
Translated by Yi-Ling Huang

The Site and History of the Event

2007-04-29T18:49:00.000+08:00

Seated on the 1,500 km high Mount Smangus in Jian-Shih Township, Hsin-Chu County, Taiwan, Smangus may be said to be the most remote indigenous village of Taiwan. No electricity was available until 1979, and no opening road was ever built until the end of 1995. Before the construction of the opening roads, the inhabitants had to go on foot for several hours to Hsin-Kuang village that was across the valley to get contact with the outside world and to get the grocery. However, the discovery of the giant tree and the construction of the roads solved the problem and started to attract tourists.

The beech buried in the landslide caused by Typhoon Haitang, Sept. 2nd, 2005

One day after the severe typhoon left Taiwan.

Seeing that there were landslides and damages all over the place, the Smangus crew conducted road repairs the day after the typhoon ended.

During the process of the repair, the inhabitants budged the beech to the roadside without any assistance of the Forestry Bureau. Over a month later (on October 12th, 2005), they were shocked to discover that some parts of the main trunk had been sawn and taken away, leaving the tree roots and the remains of the tree crown. The Smangus people complained that whoever had taken the trunk of the tree had not given any notice to the tribe at all was in violation of Taiwan’s “Aboriginal Basic Law”. The inhabitants carried the remains of the tree back to the tribe. The Forestry Bureau subsequently charged them with stealing forest by-products.

"Our community holds a meeting to discuss the village issues every day."

The landlords (we, the Smangus people) took the wind-fallen wood into our home village but were accused by the Forestry Bureau, which said that we had smuggled the timber while they were understaffed. They neglected to acknowledge that it was right and proper for us to use wind-fallen timber in our own home village as has been practiced for thousands of years.

Why must the indigenous people apply to the related government departments when we take any of the wild vegetables and or dead wood? Some of the government departments, such as the Forestry Bureau, the Police, and the Judicial Yuan, work together to persecute Smangus under the name of the state. Please find the adjudication of the first instance made by Taiwan Hsin-Chu District Court as the following: The penalty shall be 6 months of imprisonment, the fine of NT$160, 000 for each person, and suspension of punishment for two years. (The village has received the verdict on April 26th, 2007) What on earth is the government doing?

Arr. by Ruei-Ling Chen
Trans. by Yi-Ling Huang

We Protested an Unfair Trial

2007-04-29T18:41:00.000+08:00

Taking up the banners with the words written, “Implement the Aboriginal Basic Law!” “The Forestry Bureau Must Apologize to Smangus!” “Dignity! No Guilt!” on them, we went on the street to state and plead to the Forestry Bureau for falsely accusing Smangus of larceny when they dealt with the wind-fall wood on repairing the joint roads the previous year.

Arr. by Ruei-Ling Chen
Trans. by Yi-Ling Huang

Icyeh Sulung(chief):“Why don't you just put all of us behind the bars?”

2007-04-29T18:34:00.000+08:00

Icyeh the wise chief cried out, “Why don't you just put all of us behind the bars?”

And why did such a moderate chief breathe out the voice of wrath?