The name tag of Center for Disease Control Director General Su Ih-jen (蘇益仁), who headed Taiwan's delegation to the Global Conference on SARS held in Kuala Lumpur, carried the correct title of "Director-General CDC Taiwan" without the word "China" anywhere on it.
Meanwhile, PFP Legislator Kao Ming-chien (
During Taiwan's fight against the SARS epidemic, Kao amazingly displayed his double-faced tactics by oscillating between lawmaker and professor, between government official and individual.
He organized the so-called "cross-strait anti-SARS videoconferences" at the Legislative Yuan, in his capacity as a legislator, and then he joined China's delegation, in his capacity as a professor, to attend the WHO conference in Malaysia.
His attitude achieves the same purpose as Beijing's "one China" principle, which has different versions at home and abroad, in dealing with the Taiwan issue.
For Taiwan, Kao is a PFP legislator. For other countries Kao manifests in his actions that he is "part of China."
Although Kao emphasized that he is attending this week's conference as an individual who is part of China's delegation, this still might run counter to Taiwan's national interests.
It would be worthwhile asking legal experts' advice what should be done with Kao, given the following consideration.
First, China should not be discriminated against for being the origin of the SARS virus. But its uncivilized behavior in covering up the disease, hindering WHO experts from entering China to conduct investigations and misleading other nations' anti-SARS efforts should be denounced.
In particular, its neglect of the life and health of the people of Taiwan and its barbaric use of political tactics to thwart this nation's WHO entry bid invite nothing but repulsion.
As a SARS exporter, China has even repeatedly blocked Taiwan's efforts to contain the disease. If we liken the fight against SARS to a war, China can surely be described as an "enemy."
It is quite doubtful whether Kao's attendance as a representative of the "Chinese enemy," instead of being recommended by the Department of Health, should be dealt with according to Article 113 of Criminal Code.
This article states, "A person who without authority secretly agrees with a foreign government or its agent on matters which require the authorization of the government shall be punished with imprisonment for life or for not less than seven years."
Second, as a legislator, Kao's attendance at the conference as China's representative has violated Article 3 of the Legislators' Conduct Act (立法委員行為法), which stipulates that, "[Lawmakers] should be loyal to the country and foster the highest well-being of all the people." The legislature's discipline committee should handle appropriately this case.
Moreover, lawmakers are subject to the regulation stipulated in Article 20 of the Nationality Law (
Wang Sing-nan is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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,