The Council of Grand Justices last Friday declared the National Communications Commission (NCC) unconstitutional, citing Article 4 of the Organic Law of the National Communications Commission (
Article 4 stipulates that commission members be selected according to the ratio of seats held by each political party in the legislature. While the article says that the commission should be composed of 13 members with either an academic background or practical experience in the fields of telecommunications, information technology, broadcasting, law, finance and economics, there are no restrictions regarding party affiliation.
Despite last Friday's ruling, the commission's nine remaining members decided on Monday to stay in office until Jan. 31, 2008, saying that if they quit now "it would be like leaving the engine of the NCC revving in neutral."
Commission Chairman Su Yeong-ching (
When the Cabinet first appealed the matter to the Council of Grand Justices, the commission members said they would resign if the justices ruled the agency unconstitutional. Why don't they have the backbone now to stick to that pledge? It was apparent from the very beginning that political interests would inevitably creep into the commission given the way it was set up.
Has the quality of the media environment or the quality of reporting improved since the commission commenced operations?
Instead, the only notable "accomplishment" of the commission to date was its speedy action against pirate radio stations in southern Taiwan early last month, after these stations reportedly aired malicious remarks against Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Did the commission, however, say a word when media outlets reported what could be construed as threatening comments by Ma against President Chen Shui-bian (
The grand justices said that there should be a "grace period" before the commission is dissolved. This will pacify those who argue that the telecommunications and broadcasting industries would have no one to monitor them. But the chances are slim that the legislature will be able to revise the law and provide an oversight agency in a timely and rational manner, given the reaction of the KMT caucus to Monday's ruling.
The KMT caucus condemned Minister Without Portfolio Hsu Chih-hsiung (
In a normal democracy, the legislature would, upon being told by the nation's highest constitutional court that one of its laws was in error, quickly act to review and revise that regulation.
Taiwan's democracy is anything but normal and it would appear that the public has months of childish behavior from opposition parties to look forward to, while the NCC drifts in limbo until the current terms of the nation's lawmakers end in January 2008.
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