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
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,
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
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Acting Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) has formally announced his intention to stand for permanent party chairman. He has decided that he is the right person to steer the fledgling third force in Taiwan’s politics through the challenges it would certainly face in the post-Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) era, rather than serve in a caretaker role while the party finds a more suitable candidate. Huang is sure to secure the position. He is almost certainly not the right man for the job. Ko not only founded the party, he forged it into a one-man political force, with himself