In their self-righteous protest of the Supreme Court's decision to throw out the appeal regarding the March 19 shooting incident, the pan-blue camp has once again illustrated its hypocrisy and complete lack of respect for democracy and rule of law ("Pan-blues decry court's decision," June 18, page 3).
In a democracy, criminal accusations must be supported by concrete physical evidence and/or the sworn testimony of the citizenry, neither of which were presented to the court in a way that even comes close to justifying the accusations that last year's shooting was staged.
Even if there was such evidence (and, again, there apparently is not), how on earth can anybody assume that the shooting incident influenced the elections either way? Is there polling data to suggest that "sympathy votes" were cast? If such votes were cast, then where are the thousands of citizens who, on election night, were ready to vote blue or not vote at all, and voted green out of sympathy? Wouldn't there by now, over a year later, be an outcry from these "duped" voters? Furthermore, isn't it also just as likely that the shooting incident caused anger amongst those who immediately concluded that the shooting was staged, and garnered pro-blue "outrage votes?"
My point is that these are all questions for speculation and improvable in a court of law, short of calling every voter in the country to the witness stand. Is it possible that the pan-blue lawyers do not know these legal basics, or is it at all conceivable that these lawsuits were motivated by something other than the pan-blues' self-professed concern for "justice, honor and moral conscience?"
Murray Richardson
Taipei
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
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