Last week's reshuffle of the Chinese Television System's (CTS) board of directors and the appointment of Chiang Hsia (
When the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was in opposition, it strongly criticized the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) monopoly on media ownership, saying that the media were being used as a government mouthpiece. It therefore advocated the removal of party politics from the media. During the 2000 presidential campaign, Chen invited a group of academics and media figures to draw up a white paper on media reform, laying out plans to make the state-owned media an independent public institution. But after winning the election, the Chen government failed to enact the reforms that were anticipated.
The political reality is this: regardless of how liberal or broad-based a political party might be, it will try to influence public opinion through media appointments.
There is a growing feeling that the government will now not give up control of the media. It appears then that matters must be addressed at a higher level: reform should be sought via the Constitution.
Chen has declared that he will push through
constitutional amendments. So far so good, but the amended Constitution should contain a chapter dedicated to freedom of speech and the media. This would set a standard for the media's interaction with the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government as a recognized Fourth Estate.
There should be articles referring specifically to the creation of an independent media and a National Media Commission that is not subject to the control of any political party. This body would be responsible for integrating and distributing public media resources and monitoring the performance of private media outlets, for drawing up reform proposals and for providing a rational and impartial forum for debate that can improve policy.
This chapter in the Constitution would also cover the disclosure of government-held information and official secrets. Procedures would also be put in place so that the news media can receive legal protection when exercising their right to publish. Constitutional interpretations by the Council of Grand Justices relating to media issues would be incorporated in the amended Constitution to serve as a reference for future judgements in media-related cases.
This country has only just emerged from a period of authoritarian government to become a Western-style democracy, but its laws and administrative structures are far from comprehensive. Although some are doing their best to establish a Fourth Estate, their progress until now has been unsteady.
The amending of the Constitution provides an
opportunity to accelerate this process. Anyone concerned about the management reshuffle within state-run media outlets and the question of what rights the media are entitled to should concentrate on creating a new and comprehensive regulatory mechanism that upholds these rights and protects dissent.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic