The first court hearing in the suit filed by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Apparently the KMT-PFP alliance has again changed its mind -- now, instead of a total recount of the votes, it wants a partial recount of only those votes cast for President Chen Shui-bian (
This news came as a surprise even to the alliance's most loyal supporters -- those who have been chanting "immediate and total recount" for two weeks at rallies that have been taking place at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall or in front of the KMT headquarters. Reportedly, some of them couldn't help but ask, "Isn't it more fair to have a total recount?"
Indeed, leaving aside the sense of frustration that the KMT-PFP alliance's indecisiveness has produced, the popular consensus built since the election has been for a total recount, not a partial recount. It was due to this overwhelming public expectation that Chen and Lu waived their legal rights and agreed to a total recount. Otherwise, according to the Presidential Election and Recall Law (
Moreover, no one who genuinely wishes to resolve all disputes regarding the votes once and for all can be satisfied with a partial recount, which would forever leave the country under a cloud of skepticism about the election result. A partial recount could only be bad for the stability of the country.
Besides, during the hearing on Friday, Lien and Soong's attorneys charged that the numbers of votes cast for the two camps had been erroneously reversed in some cases. In order to verify whether that accusation is correct, the votes cast for both camps would of course have to be recounted. Otherwise, the recount would be meaningless.
The main reason that the KMT-PFP alliance is asking for a partial recount is that it is unwilling to fork out money for the enormous expenses that would be entailed in a complete recount. According to KMT Secretary-General Lin Fong-cheng (
Since Chen and Lu are the defendants being dragged into this lawsuit and are cooperating out of good faith, the pan-blue camp just doesn't seem to be playing fair. This is not to mention that since, according to current law, the party losing the lawsuit will have to pay for a recount when all is said and done, all these calculations and conniving about who should pick up the bill just seem like a waste of time.
Moreover, it isn't as if the KMT-PFP alliance does not have the money to pay for a recount. Leaving aside its own great wealth, it is receiving around NT$200 million (US$6.06 million) from the government -- NT$30 for each vote garnered -- as a campaign subsidy.
Finally, since the alliance can afford to run whole-page ads in major newspapers on a daily basis to make wild allegations against the government and the president, it is hard to believe that it cannot pay for a recount.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US