The EIA review process ignored the essence of the rules that govern it. The open process expected in a democracy was short-circuited by secret meetings and excluded public debate on key topics. The EIA review committee had negotiated rather than reviewed scientific data. All of these transgressions are grounds for reversal in a democratic society.
The scientific and democratic shortcomings of this process are not appropriate for an international leader in science and democracy like Taiwan. It is time for members of the scientific community to speak out against the Pinnan decision lest it appear they have been silenced by government dollars. In the glare of the international spotlight the same brush of cronyism and corruption taints all involved. It is a poor reflection upon the validity and legitimacy of scientific study if science is so easily bought and sold.
This week and in the months to come, Taiwan has a chance to reverse the downward spiral to ecological and economic destruction and the abandonment of scientific principles under Pinnan.
We urge the EIA committee to reconsider its flawed vote by following normally expected scientific review methods. We call upon the many EIA committee members who were left out of these secret and undemocratic proceedings to stand up and oppose this decision and put an end to a project that has outlived its time for Taiwan.
John Byrne is a professor at the University of Delaware; Randolph Hester is a professor at the University of California Berkeley and G. Matthias Kondolf is a professor at the University of California Berkeley.
RSS