Anti-AIDS-Discrimination and Legal Mobilization-On the AIDS Control Law in Taiwan(1981-2009)
Date Issued
2010
Date
2010
Author(s)
Lo, Shih-Hsiang
Abstract
The legal mobilization of social movement is one of the research approaches to the study of Law and Society. The Activists can use law to frame the agenda of social movements to achieve their aim. Studying the role of “Law” in social movements can let researcher thinking about the mutual framing relationship between law and society, and then reflect on Taiwan’s law and society. I would start from the social movement study to find the conditions and methods for Taiwan AIDS movement activists mobilize the Law, I also analyze the feedback from Taiwan Legal System to AIDS movement. In order to seek the historical development of AIDS movement, I will focus on the historical dimension of anti-AIDS-discrimination movements, and also on the social context and political structure of the collective action in the legal mobilization of AIDS movement.
In 1985, department of Health started to proceed the AIDS policy in Taiwan. The hiv-infected was seen to be related essentially with gay from the disease construction of the medical experts and the governmental officials. The Infected was regarded as the abnormal, and gay was stigmatized by AIDS. The “Hiv Infection Control Act” was legislated in 1990; the legislator did not put much emphasis on the right-protection of the infected, rather on the control of the infected. After 1990, the Primary Regulation, Hiv Infection Control Act, becomes the important agenda of Taiwan AIDS activists.
In 1996, the activists made the first attempt on legal mobilization. They drafted a law amendment to proceed a legislative lobby, the activists tried to persuade the legislators into accept the draft of the activists, which is concerned with the rights of the infected and the anti-discrimination article. From the amendment of the Act in 1997, we will agree that the activists got a good outcome in the first legislative lobby. The anti-discrimination article was added, and the debate of legislative committee sided with the activists. But the law reform in the legislative dimension can not be viewed as the achievement of social movement apparently.
The anti-discrimination law was passed in the Legislative Yuan 1997, but the law is not capable of being the legal protection of the infected. The social rejective attitude and fear toward the infected don’t change by the law reform. The Act was amended twice in 2000 and 2005, the twice amendment were about the alien infected’s rights, due to the nationalism thought of the AIDS policy, the alien infected are believed to harmful to the Taiwanese and shall leave the county. Even though there is one important organization that uses legal discourse to persuade the protection of the infected set in 1997, which is the primary legal mobilization organization in Taiwan AIDS movements, but the anti-discrimination law is still just a symbol with no real effect at all. The outcome of the legislative lobby in 1997 seems to be useless for the activists. .
But the symbol is still important to the activists. In 2005, there is one legislator tried to erase the anti-discrimination article, the activists object this suggestion soon. In this event, we can find the power of law, that though the law is just declaratory but still can’t be canceled. In 2005, there is still another important event, the Harmony Home Association case, which is concerned with the housing right and the people’s not-to-be-infected right. However the other side of the rights conflict is the attitude toward the infected, and the effect of the anti-discrimination law.
After the loss of Harmony Home Association in the district court in 2006, the department of health begins to draft the law amendment, in another hand, the activists try also to make a legislative amendment to hang out a draft which is much care about the rights of the infected. In 2007, the Legislative Yuan passed the amendment which is closest amendment to the expectation of the activists; the name of the Act is also changed to be: “HIV Infection Control and Patient Rights Protection Act.” The new law put much focus on the right of the infected. And Taiwan High Court made the decision by the new anti-discrimination law and the Harmony Home Association won this case after all. Two years later, the success of legal mobilization of AIDS activists in 2007 is still questioned. We can still not say that: “the rejective attitude toward the infected is eradicated, and the AIDS stigma is finished, and there is no more denial to the AIDS. The outcome of legal mobilization in 2007 still needs time to be examined.
From my study, I find that the legal mobilization has its own conditions, even though the activists use the “law”, it doesn’t promise the fulfillment of the activists’ aim. But once the activists get the confirmation of authority of the state, the activists will be closer to their aim, and vice versa.
Subjects
social movement
legal mobilization
AIDS discrimination
anti-discrimination law
SDGs
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
ntu-99-R95a21005-1.pdf
Size
23.32 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):b901bf432278ffc1887f60ce5ed51f06