Aboriginal Law (pre-1624)
The earliest majority inhabitants of Taiwan were probably from Southeast Asia and are racially similar to the Malay group who inhabit Malaysia and Indonesia. Other minority groups to inhabit Taiwan during this time were the Han Chinese, Japanese traders, European explorers, missionaries, and other traders. One origin of law of Aboriginal peoples came from a concept of chongzu 崇祖, or ancestral worship. Ancestral spirits were believed to exist forever and co-exist among the living. It was thought that if you violate customs or taboo, this would possibly result in some sort of catastrophe and would require subsequent prayer to the ancestors to avoid such a catastrophe from happening again. Breaking the law was thought to have the result of multiple levels of trouble for you or your family. Criminal Law at this time took on the philosophy of “an eye for an eye”. Another important aspect was the concept that traditional customs, no matter what the content, were accepted as normal. Most laws and customs were passed by word of mouth. Tribes had a chief that was elected or chosen by bloodline. He was considered the local leader and representative to foreign tribes. Penalties for unlawful acts were separated into non-property related penalties (ex. bodily harm) and property related penalties. Non-property related crimes would result in corporal punishment such as caning. Property related crimes would result in compensation. The leader of the tribe was arbitrator to disputes.
Read more about this topic: Law In Taiwan
Famous quotes containing the words aboriginal and/or law:
“John Eliot came to preach to the Podunks in 1657, translated the Bible into their language, but made little progress in aboriginal soul-saving. The Indians answered his pleas with: ‘No, you have taken away our lands, and now you wish to make us a race of slaves.’”
—Administration for the State of Con, U.S. public relief program. Connecticut: A Guide to Its Roads, Lore, and People (The WPA Guide to Connecticut)
“If he who breaks the law is not punished, he who obeys it is cheated. This, and this alone, is why lawbreakers ought to be punished: to authenticate as good, and to encourage as useful, law-abiding behavior. The aim of criminal law cannot be correction or deterrence; it can only be the maintenance of the legal order.”
—Thomas Szasz (b. 1920)