Showing posts with label About the Event. Show all posts
Showing posts with label About the Event. Show all posts

2007-10-21

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

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.

2007-06-06

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

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)

2007-06-05

The Statements of Declaration, from The Conference of Pihaban Alliance



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


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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




On May 21, Pinhaban Alliance Forming ceremony --




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



The statements of the Pinhaban Alliance are as the follows:



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


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


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


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


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


Host: Smangus Community Assembly


Sponsor: Smangus Action Alliance


Contact: Lahwy Icyeh





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

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

By Smangus Action Alliance

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Response: None.

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

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

【Smangus & Smangus Action Alliance News】

Pinhaban530 : Alliance of Defense and Offence:

Defend the Right to the Land of Smangus !

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

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

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

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

Our Petitions

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

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

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

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

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

Convener: Batu Icyeh 886-911-257093

Head Executive: Omi Wilang 886-910-024675

Public Relations: Lahuy Icyeh 886-912-238070

Sponsor: Smangus and Smangus Action Alliance

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

History of “Wind-fall Beech Event”


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


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


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

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


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


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

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


Translated by Yi-Ling Huang, Eco

2007-06-03

Forest Guardians Find a Future

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

2007-05-31

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

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

2007-05-29

Reflect on the first court sentence for the windfall beech dispute

(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

2007-05-23

How Taipei is breaking promises to Aborigines

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

2007-05-09

Smangus and Smangus Action Alliance News

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/

2007-05-01

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

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.)



2007-04-29

Confrontation with the Bureau of Forestry

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:

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