The vote-buying scandal in Kaohsiung is snowballing. The more councilors that are taken into custody, the higher the number of councilors offering to become witnesses for the prosecution in exchange for a suspension of charges. Two questions arise from these developments. First, is a suspension of charges for accomplices-turned-prosecution witnesses in line with the principles of social justice? Second, can Kaohsiung's City Council continue to monitor the city government and its policy implementation even though most of the city councilors were involved in the scandal? The strength of local democracy in Kaohsiung City hinges on these questions.
DPP Chairman Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) suggested Tuesday that charges against the councilors involved be suspended only after they give up their seats. This suggestion meets demands for social justice. This newspaper would also like to see prosecutors demand that councilors not be given immediate amnesty. Although they would be redeeming themselves by admitting their mistakes, there is still a price to pay.
The opposition parties have echoed Chen's remarks. However, parties can no longer influence the councilors they have already expelled. Besides, whether charges should be suspended in exchange for a resignation should be evaluated by prosecutors on a case-by-case basis.
The Kaohsiung City Council has already been severely compromised. How can Kaohsiung residents expect a tainted council to represent them? The legal wrangling would likely go on throughout their terms of office, even as councilors would be expected to exercise their duties.
According to an opinion poll, 74 percent of Kaohsiung residents want a new city council election. This is a powerful message from the grassroots, showing that the public demands not only that the speaker and vice speaker step down, but that the entire council be re-elected.
In accordance with the Law on Local Government Systems (地方制度法), a new city council election can only be held after 13 councilors abandon their seats. Even if prosecutors offer to suspend charges against bribe-taking councilors in exchange for their resignation, there might only be five or six elected representatives who go this route. If a sufficient number of city councilors who were not involved in the scandal voluntarily resign in order to trigger new city council election, we believe that the voters would warmly embrace these martyrs for respecting the opinion of their constituents. Re-election bids should be fairly easy for them.
In money-for-favors politics, bribed councilors would cling to their posts like a drowning person to a piece of wood in an attempt to protect their interests. It appears quite impossible that they would give up their positions. But we still hope that their parties' power of moral persuasion, public pressure and the conscience of the misguided councilors will trigger enough resignations to make a new city council election possible. Only by succumbing to one of the above three forms of pressure can the bribe-takers atone for the harm they've done to democracy in Kaohsiung.
Kaohsiung City, once known as the democratic heartland of Taiwan's opposition movement, has been tarnished by this bribery. Conduct a second election for the city council and make Kaohsiung's tainted council a watershed in Taiwan's anti-corruption campaign.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS