Enough has been said about the timing of Taipei City police in dispersing the tail of the Wild Strawberry Student Movement at Liberty Square on Thursday morning — only hours after Human Rights Day ended — so there is no need to dwell on the irony of it all.
What is of more concern here is the obliviousness of the police to their growing image as a partisan agency and the slapdash approach they use in determining when and how to enforce the law.
On Thursday, Zhongzheng First Precinct head Chen Ming-cheng (陳銘政) said that several complaints had been received about the protesters’ presence in the square. The offended parties were not identified, nor were the merits of the complaints canvassed.
Given the large amount of time that Liberty Square and nearby areas saw occupation by pan-blue-camp protesters during the Democratic Progressive Party’s eight years in power — with little incident and even less police intervention — the police account reeks of pretext, and one so risible that commanders must be oblivious to the possible consequences.
It is as if the police could not rely on the law itself and had to call on anonymous discontent to justify the dispersal of peaceful protesters.
Also of concern is the behavior of police in apprehending Tibetan protesters at the same location and, in some cases, taking them to the hills of Neihu District (內湖) — in Taipei City terms, the middle of nowhere — and dumping them there. In some cases the hapless Tibetans did not even have the language skills to ask for directions.
It is not clear what this technique might be called in the National Police Agency officers’ manual, but from a legal standpoint it borders on abduction.
Dumping protesters in remote locations is a practice that must cease forthwith. If not, the police will once again invite scrutiny from international rights observers — not something that they would relish given the thoroughgoing incompetence of senior police in dealing with foreign observers.
While the somewhat exaggerated response in certain newspapers to this incident was predictable — Tibetans claiming Taiwan is more and more like China, and so on — the salient point remains that the government has no deep understanding of what human rights are, what kind of society defends them and the socioeconomic consequences of their decay, let alone the desire to instill in law enforcement authorities heightened procedural respect for criminal suspects and other people with whom they interact.
Week after week, the national and Taipei City governments have privileged theoretical entitlements of residents and bureaucratic expense over the natural right to free speech and assembly. Yet, despite all the bad press here and overseas, no one is learning anything, and senior police seem to be intent on showing that their word is final rather than acting as custodians of order in the face of frequently shaky law.
Most of all, the political mishandling of these harmless protests has been breathtaking. As with Premier Liu Chao-shiuan’s (劉兆玄) comment that the student movement wouldn’t last more than a few days — a precious incentive for the students to continue that was obvious to everyone except the premier — the police actions at Liberty Square are likely to spread distrust between civic associations and the police.
Someone with a semblance of wisdom and authority is going to have to turn to the president, the premier and the mayor of Taipei and say that things cannot continue like this. If taking a hard line with protesters with bona fide grievances is this administration’s idea of governance, it might like to reflect on what could happen if autocratic impulses continue unabated in a time of growing economic hardship.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS