日本在殖民地台灣的統治初期，即以高山族原住民族不具有法律上之人格，非帝國臣民等為由，連最形式意義的法治原則都不願施行；從而在實踐上確立了對於高山族原住民族「不適用一般法律」的作法。按1900年台灣總督府表示：被告為高山族原住民的刑事案件起訴與否須經其同意，即明白排除現代法上法治原則之適用，並漸次確定由行政機關對高山族原住民事務自由裁量的統治機制。1915年理蕃事業結束後，絕大部分蕃地已被納入國家的有效統治範圍內，蕃人亦被承認為帝國臣民，但前述「蕃人不適用一般法律」的作法，僅對於劃歸普通行政區域的高山族原住民族（多數為在東部的阿美族）略有所調整，而對於在蕃地的高山族原住民族則始終維持著。直到1930年霧社事件後，日本統治當局為加強對高山族原住民族的「教化」，方擬使其「漸次適用一般法律」，但尚不及實施即戰敗離台。 日本殖民統治當局對於高山族原住民惡行的制裁，大概可分「進入司法體系適用一般法律」、「行政機關自為裁量」、「依舊慣或社內規約」等三類。按進入司法體系者少之又少，在部分時期還需經過總督之同意，故「行政機關的自為裁量」以及「依舊慣或社內規約」，才是處理高山族原住民惡行的主要手段。關於行政機關的裁量，也僅台東廳曾制頒「蕃人懲罰內則」，有較明確的判斷基準，其餘州廳幾乎就是聽任官員就個案自由處斷。「舊慣」在1930年代之後逐漸成文化為「社內規約」，但其之執行亦須得到警察的批准。因此這兩種類型的懲罰，其實都是由基層的理蕃警察所掌握。而理蕃警察的處置方式，實參雜了現代法的元素以及原住民族的傳統習慣。就此而言，高山族原住民族在日治時期已曾接觸過現代法律觀念，只不過其所生的影響非常有限。

At the beginning of Japanese rule on Taiwan, the Japanese colonialist rejected to apply the principle of rule by law to the ”mountain” indigenous peoples on the ground that they were not ”persons” in the law and not subjects of the Japanese Empire. According to an order issued in 1900, criminal defendants who were ”mountain” indigenous peoples would not be prosecuted without the consent of the Governor-General of Taiwan. The criminal sanctions upon them therefore were not decided by the prosecutor, whose duty was to implement the law, but the Governor-General, who would take political needs into account. The governing affairs relating to ”mountain” indigenous peoples were gradually decided by the police. After 1915, almost of ”mountain” indigenous peoples had been conquered by the Japanese Empire and thus had become Japanese subjects; nevertheless, they still were not governed by the law, with the exception that those who inhabited in the ”ordinary administrative area.” After an anti-government incident occurred in 1930, the Japanese authorities declared to gradually apply the law to ”mountain” indigenous peoples for the purpose of assimilating them. That, however, was never carried out because the Japanese authorities left Taiwan in 1945 due to their failure in the World War Ⅱ. There were three patterns on the criminal sanctions imposed upon ”mountain” indigenous peoples during the Japanese colonial period. The first pattern was to be decided by the law in the court. The number of the first one is quite small. The second pattern was to be disposed at discretion by the executive branch, that is, the police authorities. There were almost no regulations giving criterions for the disposition of the police. The third was to be decided by old customs with the approval of the police. The latter two in fact occupied the super-majority of them. It should be noted, however, that the disposition or approval of the police mentioned above had to a certain extent incorporated some elements in the modern criminal law. In sum, ”mountain” indigenous peoples had already contacted the modern law under the Japanese rule, although the scope and degree of this contact were very limited.