The Taiwan referendum observation mission of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe observed the first nationwide referendum in Taiwan yesterday. We have noted the legal failure of the two referendum questions, as they did not reached the turnout requirement of 50 percent of the electorate.
However, we understand that this is not the end of the history of referendums in Taiwan, but the beginning, as there are at least three essential lessons to be learnt from the country's first practical experience of referendums.
First, abolish the 50 percent turnout quorum for referen-dums. By having a turnout quorum of 50 percent the free and fair democratic process is decisively disturbed. Such a threshold does produce a motivation for boycott strategies and does not enhance the dialogue and learning process between citizens. In the end, "no" votes and people not voting make passing a proposal very difficult. It is our strong recommendation, based on worldwide experience, to abolish the 50 percent turnout quorum in the Referendum Law as soon as possible.
Second, promote offensive instead of defensive referendums. President Chen Shui-bian (
This so-called "defensive referendum" became a victim of bipartisan competition, as the referendums took place on the same day as the presidential election. In order to promote the constructive elements of direct democracy, IRI Europe strongly recommends using "offensive" referendums on separate voting days in future.
With "offensive" referendums we mean popular initiatives by the people of Taiwan and mandatory referendums on constitutional matters, as proposed by the opposition presidential candidate, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Third, secure the secrecy of the vote in referendums We have observed the conduct of yesterday's referendum with great concern. We visited several voting stations in Tainan and could see how people had to show in public if they were taking part in the referendum or not, after taking part in the election.
This is interfering with the principle of secrecy in democratic elections and referendums and should be avoided in future.
The problem could be solved by not combining an election with a referendum, as well as abolishing the 50-percent turnout requirement. But even if these requirements are upheld, it is possible to secure voting secrecy by not separating the voting procedure.
We must express our tremendous appreciation for the maturity and accuracy of yesterday's election and referendum. After the assassination attempt on Chen, the Taiwanese people stayed calm and demonstrated to the whole world that this is a free and democratic country. A country which should be assisted in all its efforts to further deepen and strengthen democracy.
Bruno Kaufmann is president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe.
The article was first printed in the Asia Times Online and is republished with permission, since Asia Times Online published it on the 21st.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath