|
Travel Documents Issued by a Sovereign State
主權國家核發的旅行證件
Should native Taiwanese people who want to travel internationally be able to apply for travel documents issued by a sovereign state?
夲土臺灣人在國際旅行時，他是否應持 由主權國家所核發的旅行證件？
Discussion & Analysis
討論與分析
Secretary Powell's Statement
包爾國務卿的證言
quote: "Our policy is clear. There is only one China. Taiwan is not independent. It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation, and that remains our policy, our firm policy."
引述：”我們的政策是清楚的，只有一個中國。台灣不是獨立的國家，不享有作為一個主權的國家.這是我們的政策、堅實的政策。
(source: Statement by Sec. of State Colin Powell, Oct. 25, 2004)
(資料來源：10-25-2004 美國國務卿包爾的證言。
Director Wilder's Statement 韋德寧主任的證言
quote: "Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community. The position of the United States government is that the ROC -- Republic of China -- is an issue undecided, and it has been left undecided, as you know, for many, many years."
(source: Statement by Dennis Wilder, US National Security Council Senior Director for Asian Affairs, Aug. 30, 2007)
引述：臺灣或中華民國、在這個時點的國際社會中皆不是國家，美國的立場是 ”ROC中華民國” 是一個尚未決定且遺留下來的議題，你也知道，這已經是很多年以來仍尚未解決的事。
Roger C. S. Lin et al. v. United States of America
林等一群人 控訴. 美國
quotes: 引述
(March 18, 2008 District Court Decision) [The Native Taiwanese] Plaintiffs have essentially been persons without a state for almost 60 years. The last completely clear statement of authority over Taiwan came from General MacArthur in 1945. One can understand and sympathize with Plaintiffs' desire to regularize their position in the world.
(03-28-2008 哥倫比亞地區法院判決文) , 60幾年來〔夲土臺灣人〕原告、實質上是沒有國籍的人，最終有關臺灣地位最完整的權威敘述是來自1945年麥克阿瑟將軍令第1號； 我們理解和同情這些原告們為爭取其有國際正常地位的殷殷期盼。
(April 7, 2009 Court of Appeals Decision ) America and China's tumultuous relationship over the past sixty years has trapped the inhabitants of Taiwan in political purgatory. During this time the people on Taiwan have lived without any uniformly recognized government. In practical terms, this means they have uncertain status in the world community which infects the population's day-to-day lives. This pervasive ambiguity has driven Appellants to try to concretely define their national identity and personal rights.
(04-07-2009 高等法院判決文) 在過去60年，由於美國和中國之間糢糊不清的關係，致使原臺灣住民陷入了政治的煉獄中，在這段時間、他們生活在沒有被承認的政府狀態下，就實際狀況來說，他們是生活在身份不確定的國際社會裡，這已經影響到他們日常的生活，在這樣的普遍的不確定性氛圍下，乃趨使原告們企圖要明確的澄清自己的國籍和其個人應有的權利。
According to the above data, the United States Executive Branch and U.S. courts do not recognize the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan as a sovereign state. So, what is the ROC on Taiwan? Based on the legal and historical record, Taiwan was Japanese national territory until Japan renounced all of its rights, claims, and title in the San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT) of 1952. Hence, it seems reasonable to say that when the ROC moved its central government to occupied Taiwan in early December 1949, it was moving outside of China's national territory and immediately became a government in exile.
根據以上資料可佐證美國行政部門及法院並不承認中華民國(ROC)在臺灣是一個主權國家；那麼中華民國在臺灣是什麼？根據法理和歷史、臺灣原是日本的領土直至1952年舊金山和平條約(SFPT) 日夲放棄其對臺灣所有的權利、名器與請求權。因此，我們可以合理的認定在1949年、當中華民國將其中央政府搬至(逃難至)佔領中的臺灣時，那表示它已從中國的領土遷離，從那時起就已成為流亡政府了。
Reference may be made to the case of Sheng v. Rogers, D.C. Circuit, Oct. 6, 1959, where the judges examined the legal status of Taiwan in detail, and held: " . . . that the Government of the Republic of China exercises authority over the island; that the sovereignty of Formosa has not been transferred to China; and that Formosa is not a part of China as a country, at least not as yet, and not until and unless appropriate treaties are hereafter entered into. Formosa may be said to be a territory or an area occupied and administered by the Government of the Republic of China, but is not officially recognized as being a part of the Republic of China." (Emphasis added.)
我們也可以從10-06-1959華盛頓巡迴法庭Sheng v. Rogers的案例中法官們詳細的審視臺灣的法理地位資料獲得理解如下 “ 中華民國的當局是在這個島上行使權力；而福爾摩沙的主權並未移轉給中國；福爾摩沙並不是中國國土的一部份、至少現在還不是，一直到除非有相應的條約來做處理的依據。福爾摩沙或許可以說是塊領土或是由中華民國所佔領或治理的一個地區，但福爾摩沙並不是被正式承認為是中華民國的一部份。
Based on the above it is clear that there was no "Taiwan Retrocession Day" on Oct. 25, 1945, the ROC has never held the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan, and the issuance of ROC passports to native Taiwanese persons is without legal basis.
根據以上的說明可以清楚的明白10-25-1945並非是中華民國所自稱的”光復節”，中華民國ROC並沒有擁有臺灣的主權，因此、它所發行給本土臺灣人的中華民國護照並沒有法律依據。
DEFINITION 定義
Native Taiwanese People本土臺灣人 (原臺澎住民及其後代)
Upon the signing of the surrender documents by the Japanese Emperor on Sept. 2, 1945, all people of Taiwan bearing household registration in Japanese-governed Taiwan and their descendants continuing to possess household registration in Taiwan up to the present.
在09-02-1945日本天皇簽署 ”投降書” 前、在臺灣設有戶籍的人、以及其至今在臺灣仍設有戶籍的後代子孫們是為本土臺灣人。
Importantly, the human rights of the native Taiwanese people are being violated and have been violated since the end of World War II. They are native Taiwanese people, not Chinese citizens. As such, they should not be forced to carry ROC passports.
重要的是本土臺灣人的人權被侵犯並且從二戰結束以來一直被不停的侵犯。他們是夲土臺灣人、並非是中國公民。因此他們(夲土臺灣人)不應被逼迫拿(使用)中華民國護照。
Passports and Nationality 護照與國籍
The Republic of China passport carried by native Taiwanese people clearly indicates the bearer’s nationality as “Republic of China.” Under international standards however, such a nationality designation does not exist. This is explained as follows.
依國際標準局的分類，對於拿(持)中華民國護照的夲土臺灣人來說，這意味著持有人的國籍是中華民國；但中華民國”ROC”這種命名在國際上實際是不存在的，玆說明如下
ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 codes are three-letter country codes defined in ISO 3166-1, part of the ISO 3166 standard published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), to represent countries, territories, etc. These three-letter abbreviations have been formally adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as the official designation(s) of a “recognized nationality” for use in manufacturing machine-readable passports, carried by travelers in order to deal with entry/exit procedures at customs authorities in all nations/territories of the world.
國際標準組織(ISO)3166-1分類的 “起頭3碼” 是以 “國家名稱” 的 “3個字母”來代表那一個 “國家” 或 “地區” ；這 “3個字母” 的國名縮寫也正式的由國際航空組織(ICAO)所採用，並以之用來處理旅行者出入某國或某地區海關時，可經由智慧版機器來快速識別其護照的 “國名符號”、以方便護照持有人在世界各國依法快速方便的出入國境。
According to these three-letter ISO country codes adopted by ICAO, the “Republic of China” is not a recognized nationality in the international community, and thus there is no “ROC” entry.
根據由際航空組織(ICAO)所採用的 “3個字母” 的國名縮寫、在國際社會裡、中華民國已經不是一個可用來識別的國家，也沒有 “ROC” 3個字母可以輸入Key in的機制。
This is a serious human rights issue for native Taiwanese people, because Article 15 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says everyone has the right to a nationality.
對本土臺灣人而言、這是非常嚴肅的人權議題，根據世界人權宣言第15(1)條明白記載 “每一個人均應有其國籍”。
What is the Solution to this Problem?
那麼，如何解決這個問題?
At the minimum, the native Taiwanese people should be entitled to hold "travel documents" issued by a sovereign state.
至少(最低限度)，本土臺灣人應被賦予由一個主權國家發給他們 “旅行證件”。
The question then arises, "Which sovereign state should take the responsibility for issuing 'travel documents' to native Taiwanese people?" The following excerpts from the Foreign Relations of the United States series, edited by the Department of State, offer some important insights:
那麼，現在問題來了；是那一個主權國家必須負起責任發行 “旅行證件” 給夲土臺灣人？我們應可以由國務院編纂的”美國國外關係-系列” 中 節錄出一些重要的內容來深入了解。
Foreign Relations of the United States ”美國國外關係-系列”
June 9, 1949
Plebiscite Proposal 住民自決提案
There has been no recognition (by the Allies) that Taiwan has been incorporated into Chinese territory.
二戰後，沒有任何前同盟國家承認臺灣已經被編入中國領土。
Oct. 23, 1949
Right of conquest 征服(佔領)的權力
Chinese President Li Zongren is in favor of joint Sino-American Commission to govern Taiwan, but admits US could take control based on right of conquest.
中華民國總統李宗仁贊成中美共管臺灣；但要求美國依征服(佔領)的權力來控管臺灣。
Dec. 3, 1949
Special Responsibility of US 美國的特別責任
The United States has a special responsibility for Taiwan due to its military liberation of the island.
因為美國是以軍事力量解放了這個島嶼，因此美國對臺灣有不可抹消的特別責任。
Oct. 23, 1950
International Problem 國際問題
By sending the Seventh Fleet into the Taiwan Strait, the U.S. Executive Branch has forcefully emphasized its position that Formosa is an international problem.
經由派遣第七艦隊護衛臺灣海峽，美國行政當局大力的強調福爾摩沙的地位屬於國際問題。
Nov. 11, 1950
No Formal Act 沒有正式法律(法案)
To date, no Formal Act restoring Formosa & the Pescadores to China has occurred.
到目前(2014年7月)為止，沒有任何正式的法律有將臺灣和澎湖返還中國。
Nov. 16, 1950
Principal Victor over Japan 對日夲的主要戰勝國
As principal victor over Japan, the US has a great responsibility in regard to the disposition of Formosa.
做為對日夲的主要戰勝者，美國對福爾摩沙(臺灣)的處理有其不可抹滅的鉅大職責。
May 3, 1951
Occupation of Formosa 福爾摩沙的佔領
There are many types of military occupation, and the US could occupy Formosa without any Americans being present . . . .
佔領有很多種方式，而美國所使用的方式是不需要有任何美國人在 ”現場(街上)”的佔領。
June 2, 1952
Undetermined sovereignty 尚未決定的 (領土)主權
Sovereignty over Formosa is still undetermined with the coming into force of the San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT) on April 28, 1952.
自04-28-2014舊金山和平條約(SFPT)生效以來，福爾摩沙的主權一直尚未做最終決定。
Sept. 27, 1954
Inchoate Juridical Status 早期初始的法律地位
Formosa and the Pescadores (aka "Taiwan") have an inchoate juridical status under SFPT, however Kinmen and Mazu have continuously been Chinese territory.
依據舊金山和平條約SFPT、福爾摩沙和澎湖列島(亦稱 “臺灣” ) 有其早期初始的法律地位，然而金門和馬祖依然是屬於中國的領土。
Oct. 14, 1954
US juridical position 由美國法理管轄的地位
Neither the San Francisco Peace Treaty of April 28, 1952, nor the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty (Treaty of Taipei) of Aug. 5, 1952 can be interpreted to say that Formosa and the Pescadores have been ceded to China. Importantly, the United States retains a juridical position in these islands.
不論04-28-1952舊金山和平條約或是08-05-1952日中和平條約(台北條約)均無法詮釋福爾摩沙和澎湖已經割讓給中國；重點是、重要的是根據條約美國被授與保有合法管轄這些島嶼的法律地位。
Oct. 18, 1954
Distinctive Juridical Status特殊的法律地位
(Eisenhower:) Technically, Formosa and the Pescadores are not under Chinese sovereignty. The Chinese Nationalists are living in a privileged sanctuary.
艾森豪總統說：（Dwight David Eisenhower，1890-1969，美國第三十四任總統），
嚴格的按照法律來說，福爾摩沙和澎湖並不是包含在中國的【領土主權】之內，這些逃難的中國國民黨及其人民們何其幸運、能以福爾摩沙和澎湖為庇護所(避難所)
Oct. 28, 1954
Unsatisfied US Interest 未盡滿足的美國利益
Japan did not cede sovereignty over Formosa and the Pescadores to China. Japan renounced its own sovereignty but left the future title undefined. As principal victor over Japan, the United States has an unsatisfied interest in these former Japanese islands.
日夲沒有割讓福爾摩沙和澎湖的領土主權給予中國；日本是放棄了她對福爾摩沙和澎湖的領土主權，卻留下了對臺、澎未下定義的、未來所有權的歸屬的問題。但，做為日本的主要戰勝國，美國對福爾摩沙和澎湖自有其未盡滿足意的利益。
July 1, 1955
United States Could Assert Legal Claim 美國能堅決主張其合法權益
In the peace treaty, Japan has merely renounced sovereignty over Taiwan, but there has been no other disposition. The United States also has an interest in Taiwan and could assert a legal claim to the island(s). Hence, the disposition of Taiwan is not merely an internal Chinese problem.
在和平條約中，日本僅是放棄其對臺灣的領土主權，除此之外並未有其他的處理方式表達；而依條約，美國對臺灣有其被授與的利益存在，美國可以堅決主張其對這些島嶼的合法權益。因此，有關臺澎島嶼的處理並不僅限於是中國人的內部問題。
June 10, 1956
Former Japanese Territories 對前(原)日本領土
The United States has residual responsibility over all former Japanese territories.
美國 對前(原)日本領土(福爾摩沙和澎湖) 有殘餘的責任(有必需負責收尾的責任)
原文作者：何瑞元 Richard w.Hartzell (臺灣女婿 臺灣地位真相 啟蒙導師)
漢文譯者：張晴輝 Tom Chang (臺灣自治政府義工 Taiwan Autonomy Government)
校對 黃明輝 Jay Huang (臺灣自治政府義工)
07-21-2014
|
