CCP silent on own abuses
On Tuesday last week, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesman Chen Binhua (陳斌華) during a daily news briefing said that President William Lai (賴清德) had directed the courts to detain and hold incommunicado Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for the former Taipei mayor’s alleged involvement in the Core Pacific City redevelopment project.
Chen said that Lai was wielding the court as a personal weapon and implementing a “green terror,” adding that “Taiwanese ‘regional leader’ Lai is committing outrages and will be ousted by the will of the people.”
When I read Chen’s comments, I could not decide whether to laugh or cry. There is no credibility to anything the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) says, as China has no independent judiciary.
Ever since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took over the CCP chairmanship, numerous news stories have been published about Chinese officials disappearing without trace and influential business people committing suicide.
Last year, 25 high-ranking CCP officials and military officers “disappeared,” including former Chinese minister of foreign affairs Qin Gang (秦剛) and former Chinese minister of national defense Li Shangfu (李尚福).
In 2020, 260 officials and powerful people in China have turned up dead or were incarcerated while in office, including former China Railways Construction Group chairman Chen Fenjian (陳奮健), who apparently fell to his death from a high-rise building that same year.
Ko’s detention is a legal matter that was initiated based on evidence, with the independent Control Yuan carrying out the due legal process. The case is being prosecuted by a separate court and prosecutors’ office. Lawyers are deliberating arguments and Ko’s attorney is defending him.
Taiwan’s legal system provides guaranteed protections and judicial fairness. Moreover, the case has generated plenty of public discussion and commentary, including with the fourth estate — a free media — covering this and Ko’s other cases.
What fair and open legal processes and supervision of China’s “legal system” did those rich and powerful CCP and business elites have before they were dispensed with? Did they receive the benefits of a free and democratic system like Taiwan’s?
Were their cases evaluated based on legitimate evidence presented in a court of law? Does China’s judiciary ever make rulings independent of the CCP? Do Chinese lawyers work on the behalf of their clients or the government?
Is there honest and transparent social commentary and a free and open media landscape covering legal proceedings, or is it only the CCP that decides people’s fates?
The CCP is behind the wheel of China’s “red terror.”
Does the TAO even understand the latest public opinion polls of Taiwanese about the Core Pacific City case, such as a Next Media poll from last week that showed that up to 77.3 percent of respondents “definitely do not believe” Ko is innocent? Taiwanese are quite clear where they stand on Ko.
It is a shame that China does not have any organizations that are allowed to poll Chinese and ask them if they trust Xi, and if not, why? Is it because China’s red terror has stripped away public freedoms, and, at worst, taken lives?
Who would be brave enough to conduct such a poll? Who would be brave enough to be like a Taiwanese and say what is really on their mind?
Hsin-na
Taipei
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS