On March 31, the legislature passed the Act Governing Execution of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (公民與政治權利國際公約及經濟社會文化權利國際公約施行法).
This gave the two international covenants legally binding force in Taiwan. It was reported that Taiwan’s Instrument of Accession to the two UN human rights treaties would be deposited at the UN Secretariat.
The first item in Article 1 of both covenants stipulates that: “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”
The third item of Article 1 states that “the States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”
Both treaties were adopted by the UN General Assembly on Dec. 16, 1966, and came into effect on March 23 and Jan. 3, 1976, respectively.
The government of dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) signed the two treaties on Oct. 5, 1976, but the legislature did not discuss their incorporation into domestic law until the administration of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) pledged to turn Taiwan into a human rights-oriented country.
Forty-two years after the signing of the treaties, the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has now had the bill relating to the covenants pass the legislature.
This was despite the fact that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) opposed human rights bills when it was in opposition.
The Taiwan Relations Act, which was passed by the US Congress 30 years ago, states that the future of Taiwan should be determined by peaceful means. This means that in the eyes of the US Congress, the problem of Taiwan’s international status remains unresolved.
This perception originated with the declaration by US president Harry Truman in 1950 that “the determination of the future status of Formosa must await the restoration of security in the Pacific, a peace settlement with Japan, or consideration by the United Nations,” and was reinforced by the inconclusive Treaty of San Francisco signed in 1951.
Today Taiwan is on a path for the pursuit of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, human rights and independence.
It is therefore perfectly just that the Taiwanese public should enjoy the right of self-determination. In this context, the passing into Taiwanese law of the two UN human rights covenants in the legislature carries great significance.
Chen Yi-nan is vice convener of the science and technology subcommittee at Taiwan Society North.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS