Amid growing public discontent with government policies and wave after wave of public protests, law enforcement authorities are under severe strain and have on occasion gone overboard in their duties, which has prompted a large number of lawyers and human rights organizations to step in.
Almost every day in recent months, the news has been filled with footage of protesters — from university students to elderly citizens — clashing with police over a number of controversies.
For weeks now, the Legislative Yuan has been under siege, while Cabinet officials have been the targets of flash protests all over the country, their visits turning the venues into high-security zones surrounded by large police deployments. In some instances, the National Security Bureau has even stepped in. Special zones have been created where protesters are hemmed in and with growing frequency police have requested that ordinary citizens show their identity documents whenever they approach a “restricted” zone. In some cases, refusal to do so has led to a visit to the local police station.
The sense of oppression has increased and with it the fear of a return to past practices under authoritarian rule. Young men whose only crime was to wear a red T-shirt — a color associated with several civic movements — have been swarmed by police officers who suspected they were participants in a protest, when in fact they were heading for a bus station near the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) headquarters.
Other cases have been less amusing, with protesters being dragged away, arrested, harassed and physically injured. In Miaoli County, which has a particularly bad reputation, and where a German firm is erecting wind turbines, abuse by police and thugs have been especially notorious.
After observing recent developments, a large number of lawyers are saying they have seen enough and are compelled to take action. Dozens of them assembled in front of the Ministry of Justice yesterday to deliver a petition signed by as many as 1,000 lawyers, which represents about a fifth of the total in the country. Many of them are giving their time, free of charge, to defend victims of abuse by law enforcement officials and they are pressuring the government to remedy the situation. The substantial numbers are an indication of the seriousness of the situation.
However, the alarm, though justified, should be put in perspective. The majority of police officers in Taiwan are professional and kind. Efforts are also being made by the police force in Taipei to reach out to and assist foreign journalists covering recent clashes. A good number of police have also expressed sympathy for the causes behind the protests and have intervened when activists risked getting injured.
However, there are overzealous officers who are sullying the reputation of the force, and there are also signs of great pressure from above calling on police to act in ways that risk crossing certain lines.
Another development that could lead to serious problems is that the large number of protests is forcing law enforcement authorities to call upon police from outside their jurisdiction for assistance. When this happens, the bonds that have developed between protesters and police officers over months are severed, and the resultant lack of familiarity has had a demonstrable impact on the willingness of police officers to use force against activists.
As more and more police are brought in from outside, and with large protests expected this month — again over issues of land theft, forced evictions and demolitions of people’s homes — the potential for further violence and serious injuries is something that everybody involved will have to bear in mind.
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
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
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