Dirty tools for authoritarian ends

The second round of protests against President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) on Ketagalan Boulevard has left me depressed. None of the rationales behind the so-called "anti-corruption" campaign convinces me that it is anything other than an aftershock of the last presidential election.

Taiwan's next election will make it clear whether this administration has won any political achievements and if voters believe that it has been involved in corruption. If Chen's aides and relatives -- including his son-in-law, Chao Chien-ming (趙建銘) -- have violated the law, they will be judged by the law and by history.

Unless Chen is guilty of rebellion, treason or politically subverting Taiwan's sovereignty, there is no other reason to disrupt the normal course of democracy and make him step down before his term is over.

If it is proven that the president indeed has violated corruption laws, I would agree that it would be best for him to step down. This is not because clean government is more important than democracy, but because corruption would make Chen unable to represent Taiwan's democracy.

However, guilt should not be decided on TV, in polls or based on the writings of academics.

The prudent and perceptive wait until legal investigations are complete before hurling charges, but former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) isn't waiting. He has said that, if necessary, he will die trying to depose Chen.

John Wei (魏千峰), an attorney allied with the anti-Chen movement, called on the public to write letters to put pressure on prosecutor Chen Jui-jen (陳瑞仁) of the Black Gold Investigation Center. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has threatened that the results of the investigation must not defy the people's verdict. This is the first danger of the anti-Chen movement: It disregards judicial independence.

Next, Jerry Fan (范可欽), a spokesman for Shih's campaign, has announced that "propriety, justice, honesty and honor" will be the pillars of the movement.

While Fan's mantra may sound good, it fails to accommodate divergent views. If a country is to be strictly ruled by morality, then very people would pass the test of propriety, justice, honesty and honor. Poets and artists would face adversity, creative industries would be unable to develop and Taiwan's diverse array of opinions would be stifled.

Moreover, the principle of presumed innocence would be discarded and anything not deemed to fit the code of "propriety, justice, honesty and honor" would be criminal. Democratic progress would be turned back and Taiwan would revert back into a totalitarian country.

Replacing the rule of law with "moral" standards runs counter to historical trends. This is the second danger of the anti-Chen campaign: the abandonment of democratic values.

With the anti-Chen movement making toppling the president its first priority, violence may come in many forms. Cheng Tsun-chi (鄭村棋), a social activist and former Taipei City labor affairs bureau chief, has said that if Chen refuses to step down, he would launch a bloody revolution.

Yang Tu (楊渡), an editorial writer for the Chinese-language newspaper China Times, has a three-step plan to force Chen out.

The first step is inciting a popular movement to plunge Taiwan into chaos so that the people will storm the Presidential Office. Next, the Presidential Office would be forced to dispatch troops to put down the protest. Finally, with Taiwan on the brink of collapse, the US would miraculously be convinced to step in to force Chen out.