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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS