I was born in the US, and while I may be what most Taiwanese think of as a typical foreigner, criticisms of how the “American way of life” is based on excessive consumption and squandering the world’s resources have long resonated with me. This has led me to spend most of the past 35 years in Taiwan, where upon arrival I was immediately taken with people’s attitudes toward resources — attitudes that might be laughed at in my home country.
I first came to Taiwan in 1977, and saw how in many households’ family members would take turns to bathe in the same tub of water and then use it to water the flowers or mop the floor. When it came to using electric lights, people were careful to the point of stinginess. It was this energy-saving “Taiwanese way of life,” necessitated by the financial constraints of the time, that helped me fall in love with this place and its people.
Later, as the economy took off, Taiwan blindly strove to achieve just the kind of US lifestyle that I had rejected. The result is that today the average amount of carbon dioxide emissions per person in Taiwan is three times the global average, and Taiwan’s emissions keep growing faster than anywhere else.
The sad thing is that, when it comes to those US values that Taiwan should adopt, many people have not learned them thoroughly enough and people in leading positions who have studied abroad — mostly in the US — are often the first to betray those self-same values to which they pay lip service in public. In Western societies, including the US, people take great care to abide by and uphold the rule of law. Government departments, in particular, are careful not to be seen as undermining the rule of law.
It is a different matter in Taiwan. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) received a doctorate in juridical science from Harvard University, but when serving as mayor of Taipei City he trampled the rule of law by refusing to pay the city’s National Health Insurance contribution arrears, as demanded by the Cabinet. His refusal continued after court decisions, and even an interpretation of the Council of Grand Justices ruled against his administration.
In a classic “follow the leader” move, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) dismissed as “dark clouds” and “hocus pocus” a court decision ordering a halt to construction work on the Cising Farm (七星農場) extension of the Central Taiwan Science Park.
It’s hard to know whether to laugh or cry at such comments. Wu’s Cabinet team then willfully twisted the court’s decision, claiming that it meant the science park’s management administration would have to suspend its construction work, but private corporations AU Optronics and Sunner Solar could keep on operating.
Next to jump into the fray was Environment Protection Administration Minister Stephen Shen (沈世宏). He went even further, saying in emotive outbursts that “the court will pay the price” and complaining of “judicial interference in environmental impact assessment matters.” Shen has also busied himself with obfuscation tactics, spending endless hours penning newspaper articles berating the courts for their decisions and otherwise distracting readers from the more substantive issues to be addressed.
Taiwan’s executive agencies ignore laws passed by the legislature and when the judiciary finds them to be in violation of the law, those agencies trample on the courts’ decisions. How can we allow the executive to treat the legislature and judiciary in this manner?
Through its actions, Taiwan’s government is gradually eroding and dismembering two fundamental values of Western societies — the separation of powers and the rule of law. We have been led to believe that these are core values for Taiwan, regardless of whether the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the Democratic Progressive Party is in power. Having been educated in law in the US, I am both amazed and baffled in equal measure by this trend.
Ma’s governing team includes several ministers who studied in the US. These “counterfeit foreign devils” may speak fluent English, but when you look below the surface, they seem more like students returning from China. To be fair, perhaps we should note that while the principles of separation of powers and the rule of law have been dominant in US thinking for over 200 years, these principles have only really been tested in Taiwan over the last 20 years or so.
However, what really baffles me is this: Where is the voice of Taiwan’s legal community in the face of such blatant abuse of process, to the extent of bringing on a constitutional crisis? What accounts for these people’s silence while the government proceeds to systematically trash the law?
Taiwan is a country where legal scholars and professors are given great reverence and stature. I say to them: The rule of law needs you and so does the country. Speak out!
Robin Winkler is chair of the Environmental Jurists Association and a former environmental impact assessment commissioner with the Environmental Protection Agency.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS