Xia Yeliang (夏業良), a professor in the economics department at Peking University, was recently dismissed from his job. Although Xia had reached a position of seniority in which a vote was no longer required to extend his tenure, the school authorities made an exception and initiated the procedure, which constitutes a procedural flaw. The university said that Xia had been reported for making “vicious attacks on the [Chinese Communist] Party [CCP] and the socialist system, mocking and distorting the Chinese dream.”
This makes it clear that Peking University made its decision because of political pressure.
Xia is a prominent economics academic with many publications. He has won praise in academic circles and has promoted systemic reform and the implementation of a constitutional system in China.
Xia was a member of the first group of signatories to Charter 08 — a manifesto published on Dec. 10, 2008, urging democratic reform in China — and in 2009, he called then-CCP Central Propaganda Department head Liu Yunshan (劉雲山) an incompetent and ignorant man. These statements and actions led officials at Peking University to dismiss Xia.
A university is an open forum for exploring truth and sharing opinions, and academic freedom is the foundation for its existence. Suppressing that freedom by political means constitutes a major obstacle to exploring truth and destroys the spiritual cornerstone of a university — a university without academic freedom is no longer a university.
The history of academic development also includes incidents of political interference: There was the April 6, 1949, incident when military and police arrested 200 students at the student dormitory of the precursor to today’s National Taiwan Normal University; the persecution of Yin Hai-kuang (殷海光), a philosopher considered one of the nation’s pioneers of democracy; and the systematic purge of liberal members during the incident at National Taiwan University’s (NTU) philosophy department between December 1972 and June 1975.
Democratization included the development of academic freedom, which involved the removal of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) symbols from schools, student strikes to protest against the white terror, the implementation of university autonomy and the removal of compulsory classes and military training offices.
Academic freedom did not come as a gift, but was the result of a struggle waged over many years by professors and students.
As a reflection of the universal nature of the university spirit and academic freedom, we solemnly make the following demands:
First, Peking University should immediately and unconditionally reinstate Xia and guarantee unrestricted academic freedom for all its lecturers and students.
Second, Academia Sinica president Wong Chi-huey (翁啟惠) and every university president should promptly write to Peking University president Wang Enge (王恩哥) making these demands and calling on Peking University to implement academic freedom.
Academic institutions in Taiwan have signed many memorandums of cooperation and exchange agreements with Peking University. Given this, the third demand is a call for every Taiwanese school to include demands for guarantees of academic and spiritual freedom in the guidelines for conducting exchanges with Chinese academic institutions.
These demands should include freedom of expression in the fields of academia and research, lecturing, authorship, publication, faith and art. All of these should be used as reference points when deciding whether to continue an exchange.
Thirty-six professors and six organizations at National Taiwan University contributed to this piece.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then