Since the recent media reports that lawmakers from the Legislative Yuan's finance committee were pressuring state-run banks to invest in venture capital companies they had stakes in, several reporters have received threats from crime rings. The Ministry of Finance has not dared to say much about the issue, while the KMT's legislative caucus has come out in support of the lawmakers involved.
While this ugly conflict of interests has been going on, the Ministry of Justice has completed two important draft bills closely related to the issue. Yet we cannot help but feel that the Lobby Law (遊說法) and the Civil Servant Conflict of Interests Prevention Act (公務人員利益迴避法) may be too little, too late for us.
Many legislators in Taiwan have long been brazenly tailoring laws and budgets to serve their ends. Unfortunately, while we may use the term 烞candal in reports about legislators lobbying the Executive Yuan on behalf of businesses in which they have interests, or pressing state-run banks to invest in their businesses, these actions are not exactly illegal in Taiwan. Perhaps this was how Taiwan built its reputation for 烝oney politics.
According to provisions in the lobby bill, elected public representatives cannot lobby on behalf of companies they run or in which they hold more than 10 percent of the stock. Nice words, but on closer examination, it is clear that such vague and loose provisions will have no impact whatsoever on the scandalous behavior of the legislators. For instance, the bill does not provide a clear definition of what constitutes lobbying. The word 烑obby seems to remain an ornamental word devoid of legal application.
In fact, a lawmaker may find interpellation sessions at the Legislative Yuan and private 涄ommunication much more useful than any formal lobbying campaign. Also, the bill stipulates very lenient fines, only up to NT$1 million, which is hardly likely to have much of a deterrent effect.
In comparison, the conflicts-of-interest bill seems to be more interesting, as it adopts the principle of 烍oluntary avoidance, which means civil servants must take their own initiative in avoiding conflicts of interest. But in fact, this principle is one of the basic premises of democracy one which is still seriously lacking in Taiwan. In any case, this bill is also lacking concrete methods for enforcement and will thus be similarly ineffective.
Since the lifting of martial law, Taiwan's media have been pushing vigorously for the passage of 烞unshine laws. Today, after more than a decade, only one 涑ublic Functionary Assets Disclosure Law (公職人員財產申報法) has been passed. Now the KMT has been talking about the lobby law, conflict of interests law, and the Political Party Law (政黨法).
However, the KMT remains unmoved over the Political Donation Law (政治現金法) despite continued pressure from the DPP. Indeed, political donations were a major problem at the center of James Soong's (宋楚瑜) financial scandal. It is regrettable that, while eager to hit out at Soong over his political donations, the KMT is not willing to patch up this leaking hole through legislation.
For a democracy to operate properly, it needs a whole, complete set of regulations. Thus, the sunshine laws are necessary norms, which the KMT has been doing a crude job of setting up.
But perhaps the KMT can do little better. The laws may be hardly enforceable if too strict and thus too far from current practices. All we can hope for is that form may give rise to content later in the process, or that the laws will bring inspiration for still better laws in the future. But certainly, Taiwan is only in the midst of its first step when it comes to 烞unshine politics.
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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