The May 20 presidential inauguration is apparently becoming the nation's next political battleground. While it is not surprising that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Interestingly, presidential spokesman James Huang's (
However, the actual issuance of such an injunction would definitely be inadvisable from the practical and political perspectives, and would have a weak legal basis.
According to the Constitution, the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election Recall Law (
In particular, the law's Article 106 provides that upon a final court verdict overturning the election result, the original election winners will be relieved of their duties as of the date of the verdict. The law's Article 107 states that such a subsequent verdict overturning election results does not have any impact on the original election winner's performance of duties after the inauguration and before this verdict. These articles indicate that the existing law specifically provides for situations in which election win
ners are inaugurated with lawsuits seeking to overturn their victory still pending in the court.
In view of the criteria for the courts' issuance of injunctions, the PFP is unlikely to prevail anyway. One important criterion is whether there is an urgent need to prevent major harm or injury through such an injunction. Frankly speaking, one can hardly think of any harm or injury that could come from Chen's inauguration, while one can think of many that would result from an injunction against his inauguration.
Such potential harm would not only weigh heavily against such an injunction's issuance, but would also provide evidence of PFP irresponsibility in seeking the injunction.
If Chen and Lu are prohibited from taking office on May 20, what will happen to this country? The social chaos and panic are easy to imagine.
Citing the example of South Korea, where the congressional speaker is serving as acting president before courts ruled on the impeachment of President Roh Moo-hyun, the PFP is speaking about having Legislative Yuan Speaker and KMT Vice Chairman Wang Jin-pyng (
Instead, the example of South Korea should serve as a warning for the PFP and the KMT. In last Thursday's Korean congressional elections, which were perceived by many as a referendum on the impeachment of Roh by the Grand National Party, the pro-Roh Uri Party captured a surprising legislative majority for the first time, suggesting that the majority of South Koreans disapproves of the chaos and restlessness sparked by the impeachment.
If the PFP and KMT continue this charade, ignoring the people's wish for peace and stability, they will pay a hefty price in future elections.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS