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.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS