The latest pan-blue demonstration on Saturday at Taipei's Chiang Kai-shek Memorial ended in violence, and the pan-blues are planning another large rally on April 10. These demonstrations against President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his administration are of continuing concern to those who are affected by instability in the capital.
The issue of whether or not to grant approval for the April 10 protest has also been a thorn in the side of both the central and local governments. Taipei City Government, acting pursuant to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法), approved the pan-blue camp's application for the April 10 rally, while refusing its application for 16 other demonstrations between April 3 and May 20.
However, the pan-blue supporters at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall on Saturday did not end their rally at the time required, instead swarming to Ketagalan Boulevard, where clashes occurred between the demonstrators and police. In response, the Cabinet called on the city government to revoke the permit that it had issued for the April 10 demonstration.
Despite the fact that the pan-blue camp's calls for rallies are starting to sound like a broken record, the government should not restrict or prohibit requests to organize assemblies, as these are rights enshrined in the Constitution.
These activities also act as positive channels through which people can express their political views and dissatisfaction.
A minority in their number has caused clashes, injuries and inconvenience for residents in the neighborhood, but the situation is not serious enough to justify refusing their applications to hold demonstrations.
The Council of Grand Justices' Interpretation No. 445 lists those kinds of behavior considered to be unconstitutional, such as that for which there is sufficient evidence to prove that the national security has been compromised, or social order or the public interest threatened, or that which may endanger life, limb or freedom or inflict major damage on property.
The interpretation stresses that it is inappropriate to prevent rallies unless special circumstances apply.
It also says that if the agency responsible for approving the rally considers that its potential damage to the social order is based on an assumption rather than on the actual situation -- that is, if the rally does not constitute an immediate and obvious danger -- then refusal to grant the application would constitute undue interference on the part of the government.
According to the law, the government must not refuse the pan-blue camp's application for the April 10 rally.
However, the pan-blues have proved ineffective in controlling their crowds, both by being inflammatory and failing to clean up after themselves.
Therefore, the government should approve the application and make it clear that the pan-blue camp promise to disperse its people at the required time and clean up the location, or else risk having future applications rejected.
This will give an equal amount of consideration to both democracy and the law.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not