「正義」的概念是否有文化差異？「正義」的理想實踐方式，在不同的文化脈絡下是否有相異的圖像？當原住民傳統習慣規範與國家法制兩套體系交會時，何謂「正義」以及如何達致的思辨乃根本問題。本文透過大洋洲的民族誌案例，探討不同文化慣習下的行動者對於「正義」的理解與想像，以及在當代法律體系運作時產生的落差。例如美拉尼西亞社會處理糾紛時常見以「直」（rada, straight）為喻的正義美學，以「理直」（farada, straighten）為目標的處理模式，其中涉及不同的人觀、財產權、責任歸屬、賠償與修復協商，和殖民遺緒的司法體系運作多所隔閡，必須放在其強調社會關係網絡的整體文化思維中理解。本文透過大洋洲的跨文化比較研究，提供台灣原住民運動在當代法律情境下重新思考傳統與國家法制介面的參考。

This paper looks into how the concept of ‘justice’ and its ideal practiceis culturally grounded. When the indigenous customary norms encounterthe contemporary state legal systems, the questions of ‘what justice means’and how it could be achieved become fundamental and challenging. Inthe contemporary society characterized by multi-cultural compositionand global connections, divergent ideas of justice and their incongruenceoften underlie legal and political debates. Through ethnographic studies,especially the case of Langalanga in the Solomon Islands, this paperexamines the conceptualization and imagination of justice in Oceania, andits incommensurability with the formal jurisprudential domain in the (post)colonial states.
Langalanga people live in coastal or artificial islet settlements in thelagoon along the central-west coast of Malaita Island, Solomon Islands.Though a relatively small group in the island state, they dominate theboat building industry, and their shell money economy thrive withinthe nation. Langalanga people often translate the English term ‘justice’as ‘radana’, which means ‘straightness’ literally, and it also connotes theintertwined meanings of sameness, rightness, and clarity. The complexidiom of radana links to high moral value, right way to do things, and isan ideal way of social life in the community. In Langalanga, as in someother Oceanic societies, the ideal dispute settlement is often expressedusing the metaphor of farada (‘straighten’). Radana (farada) is not only thepath to the ideal situation, but the ideal situation itself. There are severalpaths to farada: customary exchange and sacrificial rituals, the churchway of praying together, and the ‘council of chiefs’. However, the essenceto its success depends on willingness of two parties to tafa (open up) andfamadakwa (clarify) the disputing points. The disentangling process ofachieving radana (farada), or the ‘constraint of form‘ that radana could be perceived and reified constitutes the aesthetics of ‘justice’. Justice isalways situated in the context of social networks in Oceania. The specificaesthetics of ‘justice’ in Langalanga encompass various concepts ofpersonhood, property, liability, compensation and restorative negotiation.The court system in the Solomon Islands operates mainly according toprinciples of English legal tradition; the notions of justice embedded inthe ‘law’ and legal procedures are alien from the rada aesthetics of justice.People are discontent with the court for failing to farada; without payingattention to the ideal of radana, the court is far away from how peoplebelieve justice could be achieved.
In recent years, activists and scholars of legal reforms in Taiwanhave explored the incongruences and even conflicts between the statelegal system and the indigenous customs. Specific courts dealing withindigenous cases have been set up in 2013, and there are plans to establishtribal courts that follow ‘customary law’ in the future. By looking intoOceanic ethnographies as comparative references, I point out that legalreform such as the survey and coding of indigenous custom and theinstallation of indigenous court should pay attention to the discrepancy inthe concepts and aesthetics of justice in the context of legal pluralism.