The theories of “Transitional Justice (TJ)” and ”Restorative Justice (RJ)” are essentially interrelated with each other. The concerned parties include the victims, the offenders / perpetrators and their communities. Therefore the state plays merely a supporting role. Punishment can not be of primary concern to justice. In the meantime, the retributivism or the commonly held judicial purposes of the state should be replaced by truth-seeking, by repentance and apology of the offenders, and by the reconciliation and healing among the victims, the offenders, and their communities. Those theories are so filled with reform-oriented energy that they are often regarded as subversive—whether politically or judicially—to modern states and their judicial systems. That is why “Transitional Justice” is prone to be misunderstood as a tool of political struggle, and ”Restorative Justice” as a cheap decoration of the criminal policies. Such predicament can be observed more easily in Taiwan, in that the so-called “Taiwan miracle of democratization” lacks nothing but a solid universal human-rights thinking. This article aims to provide a key factor for TJ and RJ so often neglected yet so important—namely a point of view of Taiwan’s indigenous people, and also to argue that Taiwan will never reach any meaningful reconciliation and healing unless indigenous human rights on TJ / RJ issues are fully protected.
Keywords
transitional justice, restorative justice, Taiwan indigenous people, victims / offenders / communities, reconciliation and healing