中国少数民族非物质文化遗产法律保护基本问题研究

【作者】 韩小兵；

【导师】 李鸣；

【作者基本信息】 中央民族大学 ， 民族法学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 非物质文化遗产是人类的生命记忆,是人类创造力的精神源泉,是人类智慧的结晶,是世界文化多样性的生动展现,是人类永恒的精神家园。随着经济全球化的推进和现代化进程的加快,文化生态发生了巨大变化,非物质文化遗产受到越来越大的冲击,许多珍贵的非物质文化遗产濒临消亡,保护非物质文化遗产刻不容缓。因此,近年来国内外保护非物质文化遗产的呼声日渐高涨。2003年10月17日190个国家参加的联合国教科文组织大会通过了《保护非物质文化遗产公约》,2005年10月20日148个国家通过了《保护和促进文化表现形式多样性公约》。中国作为一个由56个民族组成的历史悠久、统一的多民族国家,在历史上,各民族都创造了绚丽多彩的文化,少数民族文化遗产,尤其是非物质文化遗产十分丰富。但目前我国少数民族非物质文化遗产一方面正面临着消失或濒临消失的严峻形势,另一方面又缺乏健全的法律保障措施,其前景令人担忧。少数民族非物质文化遗产保护在我国具有特殊意义：第一、我国少数民族非物质文化遗产的全面保护是保护和促进文化多样性的本质要求；第二、我国少数民族非物质文化遗产的全面保护标志着对我国少数民族人权的维护与落实；第三、我国少数民族非物质文化遗产的全面保护是实践科学发展观的必然要求；第四、强调我国少数民族非物质文化遗产保护与当前国际上对土著文化保护的突出性和保护的特殊性趋势相衔接。在我国加强少数民族非物质文化遗产的法律保护更是意义深刻：第一、实现少数民族非物质文化遗产的法律保护是我国根本法的原则要求；第二、少数民族非物质文化遗产需要刚性的法律保护；第三、少数民族非物质文化遗产保护的国内法律制度建设是履行相关国际法义务的必要途径。因此,切实加强对各少数民族非物质文化遗产保护法律制度建设研究尤为重要。本论文主要运用民族学研究中的田野调查方法、社会学研究中第二手分析方法、法学研究中的分析方法和比较法律的方法等展开研究。全文除导论外,共分为五章,分别为：少数民族非物质文化遗产概念的法律解析；少数民族非物质文化遗产保护法律关系的客体研究；少数民族非物质文化遗产保护法律关系的主体研究；少数民族非物质文化遗产权的权利性质及其内容研究；少数民族非物质文化遗产的权利救济机制研究。就整体结构框架而言,本论文首次从少数民族非物质文化遗产的概念解析出发,就法律关系的客体、主体、权利性质及其内容、救济机制等基本法律问题较全面地研究少数民族非物质文化遗产的保护,属填补国内该类研究空白的探索之作。就微观局部而言,本论文的主要创新之处在于以下几点：1、尝试将“少数民族非物质文化遗产”定义为：是指被中国各少数民族视为其文化遗产组成部分的各种社会实践、观念表述、表现形式、知识、技能及其有关的工具、实物、手工艺品和文化场所。这种文化遗产价值的核心是借助物质载体所表现的该少数民族的历史文化信息利益。2、以“本源客体”与“次生客体”两种划分解释少数民族非物质文化遗产保护法律关系客体中的非物质类与物质类客体的关系。3、明确主张少数民族群体是少数民族非物质文化遗产的权利所有人,反对将少数民族非物质文化遗产持有人、传承人替代少数民族群体作为权利主体保护的观点；主张并论证将“共管会”或最小级别的民族自治行政机构(民族乡、自治县)作为可供选择的少数民族非物质文化遗产权利所有人的代表人模式之合理性。4、论证了少数民族非物质文化遗产权是一项新型权利,既不同于传统的知识产权,也没有在权利名称上与知识产权捆绑,称其为“新型知识产权”的必要；主张对这一新型权利单独立法,而不必改造现行的知识产权法框架。尝试对少数民族非物质文化遗产的权利内容进行全面界定和阐释。5、提出在《保护非物质文化遗产公约》框架下建立一个专门的全球性救济机制的设想。更多还原

【Abstract】 Intangible cultural heritage, as the life memories of human beings, spiritual sources of human creativity, and fruits of human wisdom, vividly represents the worldwide cultural diversity, and hence is our eternal spiritual homeland.With the impetus of economic globalization, as well as development of modernization, cultural environment has changed tremendously; meanwhile, intangible cultural heritage comes across with increasingly huge crash. As a result, many precious heritages are on the edge of extinction. Therefore, protection for the intangible cultural heritage brooks no delay and in recent years, the number of proponents, either domestically or abroad, is increasing. Oct.17th,2003, the Conference of UNESCO, with 190 member states, passed the convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. And on Oct.20th 2005, 148 countries passed the convention on the protection and promotion on the diversity on the cultural expression.People’s Republic of China is a multi-national country with long history and 56 ethnic groups. In the passed years, different ethnic groups created colorful cultural, left us with abundant minority cultural heritages, especially intangible cultural heritages. But right now, our minority intangible cultural heritage is facing a serious situation of extinction or on the edge of extinction. On the other hand, the lack of legal protection causes the prospect more worrisome.The minority intangible cultural heritage protection bears more importance for China as follows. Full protection for minority intangible cultural heritage is 1) the essence of the protection and enhancement of cultural diversity; 2) indicating our protection and effectuating of minorities’human rights; 3) the necessary requirement for practicing the scientific thinking on development; 4) conforming to the international protection for indigenous people’s culture, specifically to its prominence and particularity.In China, strengthening the legal protection for minority intangible cultural heritage is more significant. First, realizing the legal protection of minority intangible cultural heritage is the fundamental requirement of our Constitution. Second, minority intangible cultural heritage protection should be rigid, like legal protection. Third, domestic legal system for minority intangible cultural heritage protection is the necessary approach for fulfilling relevant international obligation. Therefore, it is really important to strengthen the researches for legal system construction for minority intangible cultural heritage.This thesis is based on different research techniques applied in different fields, varying from field-study in ethnology, secondary analysis in sociology, to analytical method and comparison method in the science of law.Besides the introduction part, the thesis is composed with five chapters:legal analysis of the definition for minority intangible cultural heritage; the object of the legal relationship of minority intangible cultural heritage protection; the subject of the legal relationship of minority intangible cultural heritage protection; the status of the right of minority intangible cultural heritage and its content; the remedy for the minorities’right of intangible cultural heritage.Generally speaking, the thesis, with the purpose of filling the blank margin of the same research branch, starts with the definition analysis of the minority intangible cultural heritage, and completely researches the minority intangible cultural heritage protection, specifically the basic legal issues including the object, subject, the status and content of the rights, and the remedy.Detailedly speaking, several innovative sparks are raised as following:1. Trying to define the "minority intangible cultural heritage" as every kind of social practice, perception, expression or manifestation, knowledge, technology and related tools, material object, handcraft, and cultural sites, as long as the minorities deem them as their cultural heritage. The core value of this cultural heritage is the historical information value represented via the material carriers.2. Using "original object" and "secondary object" separately interprete the intangible object and tangible object of the minority intangible cultural heritage protection legal relationship.3. Clearly affirming the minority ethnic group is the owner of the minority intangible cultural heritage; opposing treating the possessors or their successors as the owner instead of the minority groups; claiming and proving the rationality of applying "committee" or ethnical county or town as an option to represent the heritage owners.4. Proving the minority intangible cultural heritage is a new kind of right, and thus is different from intellectual property. Since its right title has no link with intellectual property, there is no need to claim it as a "new type of intellectual property" and the relevant legal system should be sui genres, with no reformation of the current intellectual property frame. Trying to fully define and interprete the content of the minorities’ right of their intangible cultural heritage.5. Propose to establish an international remedy system under the convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage.更多还原