It is difficult to know whether to laugh or cry at the antics of would-be Taitung County commissioner Wu Chun-li (
Because of the conviction, Wu knew he would be suspended immediately after taking his oath of office. So he turned his defiance of the local government into a farce of comical proportions, "divorcing" his wife in an effort to circumvent the legal restrictions on appointing a spouse or relative as his deputy.
The legality of this maneuver is in question, and Wu may have broken the law by faking a divorce. And it seems unlikely that he will be successful in exploiting a loophole allowing him to run for the county commissioner's post again in a by-election.
Nevertheless, a group of pan-blue legislators yesterday declared their support for Wu after he came to Taipei and made an appearance at the Legislative Yuan.
The pan-blue parties can be relied on to oppose anything the government proposes, so this is hardly a surprise. But it is still a mistake. These legislators are feeding the perception that, in his standoff with the government, it is Wu that is the victim. But he is not.
The real victims in this case are the people of Taitung and the rule of law.
Wu was convicted before an independent and impartial court. He had every opportunity to defend himself during the trial, and can still appeal.
So why, then, is the pan-blue camp so willing to support this man? Is it asserting that the nation's entire criminal justice system is a sham?
Apparently not. The pan-blue camp's membership has been perfectly willing to go to the courts whenever they feel slighted, as we saw with former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong's (宋楚瑜) libel case against the president, or the myriad attempts to challenge the validity of last year's presidential election. And they are enthusiastic about trying to drag pan-green figures before the courts on corruption charges.
Where, in all this hypocritical muckraking, is "Mr. Clean," KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
This situation is emblematic of the current political stalemate. At the point in the development of a democracy when leadership and foresight are most required, none is to be found. Few politicians, in either camp, seem to understand that there are times when partisan wrangling only weakens the political system, with everyone coming out the loser.
The pan-blue camp, and Wu himself, have cited his performance at the polls as justification for giving him a "second chance." The reasoning appears to be that because he is popular, it does not matter if he is corrupt. This is a very dangerous mentality, but unsurprising for the KMT, with its lengthy record of authoritarian rule.
Still, no one has offered a convincing argument why there is a danger in letting the law take its course in the case of the Taitung County commissionership. If a by-election were held and Wu were not allowed to run, it is likely that a pan-blue candidate would again win. There is absolutely no reason, other than spite, to oppose the government on this matter. If Wu has been wronged in the courts, then let him declare this on appeal.
And if he is guilty, how can any lawmaker with a conscience thrust him upon the people of Taitung?
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS