The recent accusations of wrongdoing targeted at President Chen Shui-bian's (
First families attract media attention the world over. In Western countries and elsewhere, media interest is always high.
But only in Taiwan -- which has few legal guidelines for where the first family starts and stops, or even what constitutes the "home" of the president -- does discussion of the first family go beyond harmless gossip. Here it degenerates into political turmoil and casts doubt on the integrity of the highest office in the land.
The very notion of having a "first family" is quite new to Taiwan, which had its first real experience of democracy -- and with it, concern for the family and connection of the country's leaders -- in 1996 with the first direct presidential election.
Until then, there was no such thing as a first family, as we typically understand it in a democracy. Soong May-ling (
Taiwan is a young democracy and is still in the process of developing the network of laws and customs that are typical of democratic governance.
One step in this direction might be to draft a "first family law" that gives some guidance on what the first family should or shouldn't do, and what can be expected of various members -- with the ultimate goal of protecting the integrity of the office of the president.
The latest issue in the anti-Chen campaign was the allegedly improper use of taxpayers' money to pay for domestic help for the family of Chen's daughter, Chen Hsing-yu (
The housekeeper resigned late on Tuesday night, however, bowing to public criticism. Soon after, the Presidential Office said that in future, Chen would pay her out of his own pocket, and that his daughter would reimburse the Presidential Office for all money paid to the housekeeper since October 2001 when Chen Hsing-yu moved into the residence.
This entire matter could have been avoided if correct protocol had been spelled out in the first place.
Time and money would also have been saved if another gray area had been clarified. The Presidential Office's Department of Public Affairs expended considerable effort a while ago on behalf of the president's son-in-law over his alleged involvement in an insider trading scandal.
A law governing the first family could also do away with the number of people who claim to speak on behalf of the first family -- channeling all public statements through one person.
All events, good and bad, provide lessons that we can build on. The first family's recent troubles offer an opportunity to build a better legal framework governing their conduct.
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,