Page 143 - 第六屆原住民族傳統習慣規範與國家法制研討會論文集

性地參與整個行政計畫的空間遭到壓縮。從另外一個角度來說，即便本文認為邵

族原住民在整個開發過程中受到了極大的委屈、集體同意權受到了刻意的忽視，
但我們不能否認的是：本案所涉及到的，乃是公權力主體（日月潭管理處）、邵
族原住民，以及開發單位（飯店經營業者）之間的三面法律關係 。在這個架構
底下，透過制度的設計，讓包括開發單位在內、利益受到影響的各方，有機會在

同個程序中充分表達立場，再由主管機關作成最終能拘束各方的決定。整體來說，
系爭 BOT 案所呈現的問題可說是：在地原住民權利的保障，單憑《原住民族基
本法》第 21 條第 1 項規定尚不充分，立法及行政機關尚須盡力使聽證程序進一
步周延化，才能體現民主原則的要求。

參考文獻

S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law (2d ed. 2004).
Stuart R Butzier & Sarah M Stevenson, Indigenous Peoples’ Rights to Sacred Sites

and Traditional Cultural Properties and the Role of Consultation and Free, Prior
and Informed Consent, 32 No. 3 J. Energy & Nat. Resources L. 297 (2014).
Joji Cariño, Indigenous Peoples' Right to Free, Prior, Informed Consent: Reflections
on Concepts and Practice, 22 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 19 (2005).

Neus Torbisco Casals, Group Rights as Human Rights: A Liberal Approach to
Multiculturalism (2006).
Annie Decker, Preemption Conflation: Dividing the Local from the State in
Congressional Decision Making, 30 Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 321 (2012).

David L. Deisley & Lloyd K. Lipsett, Free, Prior, and Informed Consent:
Observations on “Operationalizing” Human Rights for Indigenous Peoples, 2013
No. 2 RMMLF-INST Paper No. 2A (2013).
Nicholas A. Fromherz, From Consultation to Consent: Community Approval as a

Prerequisite to Environmentally Significant Projects, 116 W. Va. L. Rev. 109
(2013).
Lorie M. Graham, Reparations, Self-Determination, and the Seventh Generation, 21
Harv. Hum. Rts. J. 47 (2008).

Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton, and Will Sanders (eds.), Political Theory and the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples (2007)
Upasana Khatri, Indigenous People’s Right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in
the Context of State-Sponsored Development: The New Standard Set by

Sarayaku v. Ecuador and Its Potential to Delegitimate the Belo Monte Dam, 29

139