| dc.description.abstract | This article revolves around the interplay of ＂language, ethnicity, and norms＂ and aims to explore how hakka language rights, when placed within the context of the Constitution of our country, can construct their rights′ implications and establish their existence. It also seeks to analyze the current language laws and regulations to discern their connotations and positioning within the legal framework.
The article begins by examining the theoretical foundations of fundamental rights, especially those related to language rights. It outlines the theoretical basis required for hakka language rights as fundamental rights. Subsequently, it delves into Taiwan′s language policy shifts, starting with Policy of Official Language that exclusively elevates Mandarin Chinese and then transitioning towards a focus on native languages. It attempts to clarify the impact of Policy of Official Language on language status, language habits, and language attitudes. The article explores the present situation and context of hakka language usage and, based on the historical context of Taiwan, investigates the relationships among language, ethnicity, and norms. Finally, it examines how constitutional rights reflect the country′s values and address historical changes and current circumstances. This exploration is conducted from theoretical, historical, and practical perspectives and serves as material for arguing hakka language rights.
At the level of rights construction, this article investigates the legitimacy, constitutional basis, rights implications, and functions of hakka language rights protected by the Constitution, all within the specific social context of Taiwan. It discusses the nature of these rights, whether they are individual rights, collective rights, or a combination of both. The research finds that the legitimacy of hakka language rights can be established based on the individual level of self-realization and personality development, the group level of continuity and protection of the hakka community, and the national level of multicultural preservation and the reflection of historical injustices in language transitional justice. These aspects serve as the legitimacy basis for constitutional protection of hakka language rights, aligning them with Article 22 of the Constitution and Article 10, Paragraph 11 of the Constitutional Amendments. The protection of language rights encompasses more than just being a communication tool; it also includes perspectives on language equality, language preservation, and the freedom to choose one′s language of use. Furthermore, compared to cultural rights and freedom of speech, language rights possess distinct characteristics such as freedom rights, social rights, and equality rights, warranting separate discussion. Those who can claim language rights should do so based on their legitimacy basis, which should be restricted to individuals or groups that identify with the hakka community or languages, highlighting the fluidity of identity. Additionally, considering collective language rights, the subjects of these rights should still encompass the hakka community, particularly when it comes to the collective imagination of hakka language teaching, standardization, phonetics, and writing, which should be established through a specific process. Concerning the constitutional function of language rights, it includes objective legal obligations of Security Function of Organization and Procedure, Institutional Guarantee, and Protection Obligation Function of Fundamental Rights. It also encompasses the subjective defense rights of the people and the constitutional right to request, at a minimum, the preservation of the hakka language.
At the level of rights implementation, the article investigates the aspects and implications protected by the current language legal framework and policies, and it examines whether these aspects effectively implement the constitutional protection of language rights. The article highlights the differences between the two and aims to identify what constitutional rights the current laws have already realized, what potential shortcomings or disputes exist, and uses these as directions for future legal improvements. The research finds that the current language legal framework shifts its focus from the collective protection of the hakka community to individual rights and equality rights. It covers various aspects such as freedom of usage, language of instruction, access to public services, and access to broadcasting resources. The connotations of protection include communication tool theory, language equality theory, freedom of choice theory, and preservation guarantee theory. However, it fails to ensure that people can genuinely exercise their language choice freedom, especially when deciding whether to use their mother tongue for communication, under conditions of equal opportunities. It often faces the dilemma of normative content that involves ＂having obligations without corresponding subjective rights, having subjective rights without corresponding state obligations.＂ In such cases, people lack specific legal rights to assert, and there are no provisions for related remedies, even if declarative rights exist, they often lack corresponding and sufficient obligations. Finally, several laws and specialized statutes account for Taiwan′s diverse ethnic groups and the existence of different national languages. However, there remains uncertainty regarding how to ensure that government agencies fully acknowledge language rights protection for native languages and ensure that state obligations are genuinely implemented in each agency. In the future, addressing language usage in the private sector, resource allocation among different language communities, resolving impractical situations, and avoiding pitfalls related to Policy of Official Language will be inevitable challenges at the practical level of language rights implementation. | en_US |