On Nov. 27, an antidemocratic scene took place at the Legislative Yuan, with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) playing a leading role, and with only bit parts played by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU). When the blue camp used their legislative majority to dominate the drafting of the Referendum Law (公民投票法), the green camp was willing but not able to fight back.
Before the show, the KMT and the PFP claimed that there would be no restrictions on the bill, and the DPP and the TSU were filled with not only anticipation but also concern about this.
But the true colors of the blue camp were revealed when the legislative process began. Originally, the green camp thought that the blue camp would base its version of the bill on either DPP Legislator Trong Chai's (蔡同榮) version or the TSU's -- either of which would have allowed the people to vote on changes to the country's name, flag and territory. This would have presented the ruling party with a dilemma as to whether they should support such a bill, which may have led to Taiwanese independence. The result proved that the blue camp didn't have the guts to pass a law without restrictions.
To be blunt, the blue camp lacked respect for the ideal of "people being their own masters" (
Article 17 of the Constitution states that "the people shall have the right of election, recall, initiative and referendum." However, according to the Referendum Law, the people do not have the right to initiate a referendum concerning constitutional amendments, and can only vote on amendments proposed by the legislature. The people's rights were seriously infringed upon.
In addition, the KMT and the PFP established a Referendum Review Committee (
I cannot think of any reason why the blue camp would think that political parties have the right to veto any referendum proposal that reaches a signatory threshold, and to judge whether the people should be allowed to have a referendum regarding their rights.
What would the committee do if a sufficient number of people signed a referendum proposal to abolish the committee? Would they pass the proposal? Or would they block it? Who should review the case if the members block it?
Therefore, I believe that the Referendum Law, which was passed in accordance with the ideologies of the KMT and the PFP, is in fact an antidemocratic law.
It is a law designed to maintain the legislators' power, and under it the people are unable to challenge the authority of the legislature or the political parties.
Who if not the people is qualified to make decisions on the status of the nation?
The KMT and PFP act as if the people of the country are not mature enough to rationally decide their fate; as if they are stupid and inferior. Is this really acceptable to the people? By making restrictions on referendums, aren't the vicious blue-camp legislators bullying the people?
Chien Lin Hue-jyun is a TSU legislator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.