The Taiwan referendum observation mission of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe observed the first nationwide referendum in Taiwan yesterday. We have noted the legal failure of the two referendum questions, as they did not reached the turnout requirement of 50 percent of the electorate.
However, we understand that this is not the end of the history of referendums in Taiwan, but the beginning, as there are at least three essential lessons to be learnt from the country's first practical experience of referendums.
First, abolish the 50 percent turnout quorum for referen-dums. By having a turnout quorum of 50 percent the free and fair democratic process is decisively disturbed. Such a threshold does produce a motivation for boycott strategies and does not enhance the dialogue and learning process between citizens. In the end, "no" votes and people not voting make passing a proposal very difficult. It is our strong recommendation, based on worldwide experience, to abolish the 50 percent turnout quorum in the Referendum Law as soon as possible.
Second, promote offensive instead of defensive referendums. President Chen Shui-bian (
This so-called "defensive referendum" became a victim of bipartisan competition, as the referendums took place on the same day as the presidential election. In order to promote the constructive elements of direct democracy, IRI Europe strongly recommends using "offensive" referendums on separate voting days in future.
With "offensive" referendums we mean popular initiatives by the people of Taiwan and mandatory referendums on constitutional matters, as proposed by the opposition presidential candidate, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Third, secure the secrecy of the vote in referendums We have observed the conduct of yesterday's referendum with great concern. We visited several voting stations in Tainan and could see how people had to show in public if they were taking part in the referendum or not, after taking part in the election.
This is interfering with the principle of secrecy in democratic elections and referendums and should be avoided in future.
The problem could be solved by not combining an election with a referendum, as well as abolishing the 50-percent turnout requirement. But even if these requirements are upheld, it is possible to secure voting secrecy by not separating the voting procedure.
We must express our tremendous appreciation for the maturity and accuracy of yesterday's election and referendum. After the assassination attempt on Chen, the Taiwanese people stayed calm and demonstrated to the whole world that this is a free and democratic country. A country which should be assisted in all its efforts to further deepen and strengthen democracy.
Bruno Kaufmann is president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe.
The article was first printed in the Asia Times Online and is republished with permission, since Asia Times Online published it on the 21st.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS