| Budget Amount *help |
¥3,300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,300,000)
Fiscal Year 2000: ¥900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000)
Fiscal Year 1999: ¥2,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,400,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
In Australia, "Queer Theory" has been used to indicate, not just the existence of "discrimination" and "privacy", but also to narrate one's own story in one's own way in many legal context. This narrative methodology has bestowed the status of praxis to the theory. For example, the UN Human Rights Committee, by concluding that "sex" includes "sexual orientation" and recommended he Australian Government to abolish Tasmanian statute adjudicated as in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The recommendation made it clear that it was not enough to present one's view in traditional international law context and the obligation of sub-nation entities. In Australian legal education, much emphasis has now been given to narrative mode and story-telling in legal context.
In Canada, a totally different picture emerged as Equality Clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Liberties has been used, in and out of courts, to deal with sexuality in law. Protection of de facto marriages between same-sex partners, and acceptance of same-sex marriage provincial statutes are some of the examples supporting this phenomenon. Courts also have been keen to rely upon Equality Clause rather than amorphous queer theory and the power of the narrative to accept new theory on pornography (Butler case).
The comparison has indicated that new theory need not be THE only way to introduce new approach and new understanding of minorities' view-points. It might even be more productive to utilize a more familiar theory that has been transformed to include a different perspective.
|
