The vote-buying scandal in Kaohsiung is snowballing. The more councilors that are taken into custody, the higher the number of councilors offering to become witnesses for the prosecution in exchange for a suspension of charges. Two questions arise from these developments. First, is a suspension of charges for accomplices-turned-prosecution witnesses in line with the principles of social justice? Second, can Kaohsiung's City Council continue to monitor the city government and its policy implementation even though most of the city councilors were involved in the scandal? The strength of local democracy in Kaohsiung City hinges on these questions.
DPP Chairman Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) suggested Tuesday that charges against the councilors involved be suspended only after they give up their seats. This suggestion meets demands for social justice. This newspaper would also like to see prosecutors demand that councilors not be given immediate amnesty. Although they would be redeeming themselves by admitting their mistakes, there is still a price to pay.
The opposition parties have echoed Chen's remarks. However, parties can no longer influence the councilors they have already expelled. Besides, whether charges should be suspended in exchange for a resignation should be evaluated by prosecutors on a case-by-case basis.
The Kaohsiung City Council has already been severely compromised. How can Kaohsiung residents expect a tainted council to represent them? The legal wrangling would likely go on throughout their terms of office, even as councilors would be expected to exercise their duties.
According to an opinion poll, 74 percent of Kaohsiung residents want a new city council election. This is a powerful message from the grassroots, showing that the public demands not only that the speaker and vice speaker step down, but that the entire council be re-elected.
In accordance with the Law on Local Government Systems (地方制度法), a new city council election can only be held after 13 councilors abandon their seats. Even if prosecutors offer to suspend charges against bribe-taking councilors in exchange for their resignation, there might only be five or six elected representatives who go this route. If a sufficient number of city councilors who were not involved in the scandal voluntarily resign in order to trigger new city council election, we believe that the voters would warmly embrace these martyrs for respecting the opinion of their constituents. Re-election bids should be fairly easy for them.
In money-for-favors politics, bribed councilors would cling to their posts like a drowning person to a piece of wood in an attempt to protect their interests. It appears quite impossible that they would give up their positions. But we still hope that their parties' power of moral persuasion, public pressure and the conscience of the misguided councilors will trigger enough resignations to make a new city council election possible. Only by succumbing to one of the above three forms of pressure can the bribe-takers atone for the harm they've done to democracy in Kaohsiung.
Kaohsiung City, once known as the democratic heartland of Taiwan's opposition movement, has been tarnished by this bribery. Conduct a second election for the city council and make Kaohsiung's tainted council a watershed in Taiwan's anti-corruption campaign.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS