On April 26, police officers were faced with an awful job when hundreds of pan-blue and pan-green supporters led by dozens of legislators congregated and clashed at CKS International Airport. Although 3,500 police officers were mobilized to maintain security, they failed to contain the violent mob.
In the airport's departures lobby, staves, sticks and umbrellas were used as weapons and the floor was strewn with broken eggs and the detritus of firecrackers. The scene not only terrified foreign tourists but also tarnished the nation's image and made a mockery of the exercise of public power.
I am sure that there were many people like me who hoped that this would be no more than a storm in a teacup and the embarrassing incident would not be covered by the international news media. Unfortunately this was not the case.
Local media, meanwhile, described the airport clashes as a disgrace to Taiwan's democratization, a mockery of public power and an example of police incompetence. But this description is superficial and if we don't actually seek out the root of the problem, then no matter how many Aviation Police Bureau commissioners we sack, it will not prevent a recurrence of such an event.
The incident was all too familiar. On April 6, when Taiwan Solidarity Union Chairman Shu Chin-Chiang (蘇進強) returned to Taipei from his visit to Tokyo's Yasukuni shrine, he was also greeted with protests from various factions.
But although demonstrations or rallies are forbidden in the airport, it was the Aviation Police Bureau commissionerwho had to apologize to the illegal protesters. The police had to apologize for doing no more than their job because those leading the protests were legislators, and as such they have a say in deciding the bureau's budget. If the bureau's chief had not apologized, he would have faced the prospect of being brought before the legislature, rebuked, insulted and seeing the agency's budget slashed.
The practice of controlling budgets to control the behavior of the police is found not only in the central government; in fact it is even more common in local politics. Not only are the police denied the independence to act impartially, they are regularly used as props in various situations engineered by politicians to increase their public exposure.
The day after the killing of a police officer in Sijhih, Taipei County early last month, Taipei City forces mobilized to assist the county. This is what you would expect when a colleague has been killed. But that same day, the Taipei City Council required commanders of various Taipei police precincts to attend a question-and-answer session on sex services being offered in the city.
Councilors brought out a scantily-clad model and police commanders where required to touch the clothing worn by the model and were asked increasingly absurd questions about when they would take action. At a time when the police faced the serious task of catching a cop killer, they were being taken for a ride by city councilors, who simply wanted publicity.
In the operation of this country's unique democracy, public representatives and their friends flout the law with impunity. They show no respect for the police and so the police forces are constantly the subject of attacks. The dignity of the nation's judicial agencies suffers as a result. This kind of democracy and rule of law is like building a house with dangerous materials, such as sea sand and radiation contaminated steel. How can the public feel secure in such an environment?
We cannot but ask, in a country where such situations are commonplace, how are we going to fight crime?
Yeh Yu-lan is chairman of the Graduate School of Foreign Affairs Police at Central Police University.
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG AND LIN YA-TI
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
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
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry