Feb. 28 marks a day of remembrance for Taiwan — memorializing the incident that led to an era of martial law later dubbed the White Terror era.
This year commemorated the 77th anniversary of that pivotal event. The government’s ongoing pursuit of transitional justice includes new legislation aimed at providing an honest account of events and reconciliation.
As a step in the democratization of Taiwan by seeking truth from the past through public transparency, the government commenced a new process of declassifying documents from 1945 to 1992. While the rectification of past injustice is a move in the right direction, the next step in improving government transparency should be to expand Taiwanese’s access through the establishment of a freedom of information act (FOIA).
Late last year, amendments were proposed to the Political Archives Act (政治檔案條例) that passed in 2019. The previous mandate of the Political Archives Act allowed permanent confidentiality for all government records related to sensitive political and national security matters. However, these amendments revised confidentiality requirements.
Future modifications should give the public access to documents from at least 30 years ago. Declassification of documents related to the 228 Incident and martial law represents a significant step toward understanding and historical reconciliation for families who lost loved ones, marking the beginning of a path to justice.
Transitional justice as a mechanism to confront past atrocities through present reforms has been an important part of President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) goals throughout her presidency. With the looming shadow of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) legacy in Taiwan, the public release of the documents helps tear the bandages off the nation’s wounds.
What are the next steps forward? One direction I support would be to increase transparency between government entities and citizens through a new act that would give individuals the ability to gain access to government documents, in line with the US FOIA.
The US FOIA has provided journalists, academics and everyday citizens the opportunity to gain access to government documents that were previously undisclosed. Its history shaped its eventual creation.
The seeds of the US FOIA began as an act promulgated in 1946; it was called the Administrative Procedure Act. Section 3 of the act allowed US government agencies general discretion in the publication process of government documents.
Because of general concerns that government agencies would withhold more than they disclosed, 20 years later, in 1966, the US Congress passed an amendment to Section 3 that crafted it into a separate act.
The US FOIA, according to its Web site, “has provided the public the right to request access to records from any federal agency.”
With nine exemptions to the act (eg, personal privacy, national security and law enforcement), it requires agencies to grant public access to requested information.
Why does it matter? Transitional justice has provided an impetus to move forward in the democratization process, yet democracy is not just about righting the wrongs of the past. It is about maintaining honest communication with society at large.
For all the faults within the US government domestically and internationally, legislation such as an FOIA allows for a level of openness with the public with regard to files the government would gladly hide away if it were able to do so. By no means a perfect system — there are plenty of examples where the process can take years, or with enough money and the right gusto, one can sue the government to gain access to the documents — the opportunity for the average citizen to seek out information is quite magnificent.
Despite its flaws, the US FOIA offers a crucial level of transparency. While the process can be lengthy and challenging, it allows citizens the right to access information the government might otherwise conceal.
This empowers citizens to hold the government accountable — a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.
In Taiwan, the establishment of an FOIA would offer some benefits, as well as challenges.
Enhanced transparency would promote accountability, a level of trust between the government and the citizens, and allow for more informed dialogue. For journalists, increased access to information improves their role as purveyors of truth.
In a time when younger generations of Taiwanese are becoming disengaged in politics, an FOIA can present an opportunity to empower them to be more active in engaging with the government.
Most importantly, it strengthens the democratic values by promoting open governance.
Similar to the new amendments to the Political Archives Act, a Taiwanese FOIA would need to balance transparent openness with national security. There would need to be a robust mechanism for the enforcement of processing requests, managing resources and handling potential conflicts. Public education would be important in the usage of an FOIA to maximize the impact it could have.
So what are the next steps for the potential of such an act to be realized? Were more people to write about this topic, primarily in Chinese, it has the potential to open the gates to public discourse that could lead to debates within the Legislative Yuan.
An analysis of established FOIA frameworks can provide strengths and weaknesses, so Taiwan can implement its adaptation, and, most crucially, move toward the establishment of an FOIA to foster a more transparent and accountable government.
Stephen Ramon Fletes is a third-year student in the International Master’s Program in Asia-Pacific Studies at National Chengchi University.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s