Confusion about referendums
In reference to Chen Ro-jinn's (
We have referendums on almost every ballot here in Ohio and in Cleveland. The referendums are called "Issues," and the issues that are decided by the voters are those that pertain to the voters' pocketbook.
Let's say the county in which I live needs new sewage plants. The county would put a property tax on the ballot and ask the voters to pass it to provide the new plants. If the referendum does not pass, then no new sewage plants would be built and water quality goes down. If the federal government has mandated higher water quality and the issue of more sewage plants does not pass, then the people are agreeing to pay the fines that might be incurred.
The Pinglin township referendum was not a valid issue because it asked the residents of a township to allocate the resources of the central government. A referendum or issue can only be put on the ballot by the people or their government to allocate or control land, or money, or time which they control, or will control should the ballot be passed.
If the ballot is about extending the right of a government which is already within its power were it not for the wording of the constitution, or of a local ordinance, then once the wording is changed through balloting, then the local, county, central government can move forward. The money to implement the action would then come legitimately from the governed's pocketbook. If it were, say, a country name change, then the people would vote to either pay the price or not of the desired action.
If it is, on the other hand, a "no nuclear" policy vote and the government does not step in with an alternative plan, then when the lights go out all over Taiwan the people get to see balloting responsibility in action.
This is responsibility up front and personal, but it is also something that happens in mature democracies every day. If the voters of Taiwan go the route of a referendum then they are saying, "I am an adult and I am ready to decide my destiny and pay the cost." This action would be saying something very meaningful.
Bode Bliss
Cleveland, Ohio
Identifying money laundering
Contrary to Lawrence Lee's (
The US model is that of cash transaction reporting (CTR) -- ie, making reports to a state authority of transactions over a certain value. The US has pushed this model onto many countries, including many in Southeast Asia, but at home, the model has become, to a degree, discredited as an effective tool for identifying money laundering in real time.
The costs and complexity of data analysis of cash-transaction reporting to a state department (this is not the same as internally within a financial services business) are such that it is not, generally, successful. Of the countries with CTR, only Australia has made it work -- and that is because of the special market conditions in Australia.
The suspicion-based report model is in fact the European model. It was developed in the EU Money Laundering Directive of 1991 and adopted as the ideal by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) in its 40 Recommendations.
The US refused to acknowledge suspicion as an appropriate basis of reporting but, under the terms of its membership of the FATF, it had to do so and eventually adopted it in the mid 1990s. The US (via the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network which collects the reports) is presently involved in a review process of CTR to decide if it does in fact provide effective and cost-effective intelligence.
As the number of reporting institutions rises to embrace a wide range of non-banking businesses, the costs of CTR are burdensome on national economies. However, there are those that still support it and there is a hint in the June issue of the FATF's 40 Recommendations that CTR should be considered in all countries.
The "record keeping" model is not, as Lee says, a "British" model. It is also derived from the 1991 EU Directive.
Nigel Morris-Cotterill
Chairman, The Anti-Money Laundering Network
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