作为一种解释方法的法律多元主义:国际法下土著人民土地权非殖民化的方法论途径

IF 0.8 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas Pub Date : 2017-06-28 DOI:10.17163/uni.n26.2017.01
Jonas Perrin
{"title":"作为一种解释方法的法律多元主义:国际法下土著人民土地权非殖民化的方法论途径","authors":"Jonas Perrin","doi":"10.17163/uni.n26.2017.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ever since the arrival of the European colonisers, theories of international law have been used to justify the process of dispossession of indigenous lands. Even though the adoption of human rights have led to some amelioration, the author claims that this has proved unsatisfactory to address indigenous concerns for one reason: international law remains deeply rooted in colonial concepts, such as the concepts of ‘sovereignty’ and ‘property’. Given that these concepts clearly contradict indigenous cosmovisions, the author proposes a pluralist interpretation of indigenous land rights under international law. Understood as a method of interpretation, it is able to take into account not only ‘state law’ but also indigenous conceptions of the relationship between human beings and the land. It is thus proposed that such a methodological approach may decolonise colonial concepts of international law.","PeriodicalId":42999,"journal":{"name":"Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas","volume":"1 1","pages":"23-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal Pluralism as a Method of Interpretation: A Methodological Approach to Decolonising Indigenous Peoples’ Land Rights under International Law\",\"authors\":\"Jonas Perrin\",\"doi\":\"10.17163/uni.n26.2017.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ever since the arrival of the European colonisers, theories of international law have been used to justify the process of dispossession of indigenous lands. Even though the adoption of human rights have led to some amelioration, the author claims that this has proved unsatisfactory to address indigenous concerns for one reason: international law remains deeply rooted in colonial concepts, such as the concepts of ‘sovereignty’ and ‘property’. Given that these concepts clearly contradict indigenous cosmovisions, the author proposes a pluralist interpretation of indigenous land rights under international law. Understood as a method of interpretation, it is able to take into account not only ‘state law’ but also indigenous conceptions of the relationship between human beings and the land. It is thus proposed that such a methodological approach may decolonise colonial concepts of international law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"23-60\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17163/uni.n26.2017.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17163/uni.n26.2017.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

自从欧洲殖民者到来以来,国际法理论就被用来为剥夺土著土地的过程辩护。虽然人权的采用使情况有所改善,但发件人声称,事实证明这不能解决土著人民的关切,原因之一是:国际法仍然深深植根于殖民概念,例如“主权”和“财产”的概念。鉴于这些概念明显与土著的世界观相矛盾,作者建议在国际法下对土著土地权进行多元解释。作为一种解释方法,它不仅能够考虑到“国家法律”,还能够考虑到人与土地之间关系的土著观念。因此,有人建议,这种方法可以使国际法的殖民概念非殖民化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Legal Pluralism as a Method of Interpretation: A Methodological Approach to Decolonising Indigenous Peoples’ Land Rights under International Law
Ever since the arrival of the European colonisers, theories of international law have been used to justify the process of dispossession of indigenous lands. Even though the adoption of human rights have led to some amelioration, the author claims that this has proved unsatisfactory to address indigenous concerns for one reason: international law remains deeply rooted in colonial concepts, such as the concepts of ‘sovereignty’ and ‘property’. Given that these concepts clearly contradict indigenous cosmovisions, the author proposes a pluralist interpretation of indigenous land rights under international law. Understood as a method of interpretation, it is able to take into account not only ‘state law’ but also indigenous conceptions of the relationship between human beings and the land. It is thus proposed that such a methodological approach may decolonise colonial concepts of international law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas
Universitas-Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Implementation of outdoor recreational activities to take advantage of the natural tourist resources of the parish of Lloa-Ecuador La gestión estratégica de los recursos humanos: una mirada desde las competencias en las ciencias humanas Teatro del oprimido como estrategia de intervención para prevenir el consumo de drogas en adolescentes; revisión bibliográfica Recreation and stress reduction in university students Los podcasts y su importancia en la educación superior; una revisión documental.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1