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.
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,