For active participants in student autonomy, two negative news items this month are particularly worrying.
On June 11, school officials ruled null and void a May 28 election for president of the Kaohsiung Senior High School Student Association, because the student that won had reportedly during the campaign sought to form a coalition with other candidates and allocate them seats if he was elected, which the school determined to be a form of election bribery.
The other incident involves a June 11 election for deputy president of the Shih Chien University Student Association. A candidate reportedly took advantage of a moment when student election officers were not watching to grab blank ballots, stamp them with the election seal and place them in the ballot box, so as to ensure enough votes for him and his running mate, who were standing unopposed, to win.
The school formally reprimanded the student for ballot stuffing.
Student autonomy is an embryonic form of politics. Student associations, like government institutions, are structured to separate powers into executive, legislative and judicial branches that work together while applying mutual checks and balances.
Students have the power to elect and recall the officers of their autonomous associations. In some schools, students even have initiatives and referendums.
Participation in student autonomy fosters students’ awareness of their rights and powers as citizens, as well as independent thinking and the ability to participate in public affairs.
Elections are the principal means by which student autonomy can function and persevere. It is therefore particularly important that election procedures and results are lawful and fair.
Even the slightest carelessness can shake the foundation of students’ trust in student autonomy, and it can also cause them to lose interest in matters of public concern.
It is even worse if candidates intentionally indulge in election malpractices such as bribery and ballot stuffing. Such abuses could lead to unrest and even clashes within student associations, and cast doubt on the legitimacy of their elected officers.
Another possible repercussion is that candidates who lose an election might not accept their loss and appeal the results. If a second election is needed, it could waste resources.
It would be a dark day for campus democracy and civic education in Taiwan if student autonomy degenerated to the state of affairs possible on the dark side of real politics, rife with malpractices such as election bribery, ballot stuffing, pork-barrel deals and slander.
Hopefully, everyone who takes part in student autonomy will draw a lesson from the recent events at Kaohsiung Senior High School and Shih Chien University.
The conduct of student association elections can be rectified if students take part in them with proper dignity and solemnity.
Lai Yen-cheng is deputy secretary-general of the National Chung Hsing University Student Congress.
Translated by Julian Clegg
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS