On Nov. 6, a group of students began a silent sit-in in front of the Executive Yuan. They demanded that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) apologize for heavy-handed police tactics that infringed human rights during the visit of Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), that National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun (王卓鈞) and National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明) step down and that the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) be amended. The government’s response to these demands has been disappointing.
When dealing with cross-strait exchanges, Ma, who used to annually commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, ignores democracy, rule of law and human rights. He gave free rein to the state monopoly on violence and turned his back on the rule of law and human rights in order to “receive a distinguished guest.” This is clearly indicative of an unqualified government lacking an understanding of the modern concept of rule of law.
The police actions, such as switching off the music in a record store and pulling down the store’s shutters, closing freeway lanes, barring people from carrying national flags in public or placing the Tibetan flag on scooters and confiscating digicams, highlighted the flaws in the Assembly and Parade Law and other regulations.
We should, however, be more concerned about the government’s later attempts to legitimize these actions and the backward attitudes toward democracy, rule of law and human rights that these attempts represent.
The Presidential Office claim that the record store incident was simply a case of cracking down on noise pollution was clearly a malicious fabrication. I wonder if Presidential Office spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦), with his doctorate in law, really understands the legal procedures for cracking down on noise pollution. Did the government try to dupe the public by trying to vindicate measures that failed to follow normal procedure?
When Cabinet Secretary-General Hsueh Hsiang-chuan (薛香川) and Minister of Education Cheng Jei-cheng (鄭瑞城) talked with student demonstrators, they stressed the importance of following the law. They either do not understand the meaning of rule of law, or made a mockery of Ma’s campaign promise to return the streets to the public.
This is a “new” government applying an antiquated and flawed view of rule of law and law enforcement. Hsueh’s statement that “politics is temporary” highlights the narrow power logic of old politicians, and was a classic both in its absurdity and in its irony.
The issue that should be discussed is not the narrow stand off between the pan-blue and pan-green camps. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should of course apologize for not amending the National Security Law (國安法), the Civic Organization Law (人團法) and the Assembly and Parade Law, all of which restrict the development of a civil society and caused the DPP government to suppress the wishes of the residents of Losheng Sanatorium and other disadvantaged groups.
So what changes can we expect from a new government praising “political ethics?” Does Ma have the determination to deal with the three above mentiond laws that he promoted?
The maintenance of fundamental democratic and legal values and respect for fundamental constitutional rights override temporary politics, including temporary parties, presidents and cross-strait meetings. As the government turns its back on these values, it is in no way different from the old government.
Liu Ching-yi is an associate professor of law in the Graduate Institute of National Development at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then