On SepT. 15, one of the slogans of people demonstrating against President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was "abolish immunity from criminal prosecution and return our right to recall the president."
Some anti-Chen protesters apparently still care about the Constitution.
According to Article 52 of the Constitution, "The president shall not, without being recalled or discharged, be subject to criminal prosecution unless he is charged with having committed an act of rebellion or treason." Regardless of whether accusations of Chen's corruption are true or false, such accusations fall within the scope of criminal prosecution.
As to the recall issue, a presidential recall motion was launched by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in June, but failed to achieve the required two-thirds majority. If anti-Chen protesters believe that the current majority requirement is too strict, they must wait for a constitutional amendment before they can "reclaim the right to recall the president."
Since they are willing to consider the issue and take action based on the Constitution and the rule of law, the agitation will subside naturally and there is hope of a solution. Furthermore, Taipei City is governed by KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Thus, if the pan-blue camp looks at the issue rationally, it will show restraint and prevent any violence from occurring. The mass demonstrations of Sept. 15 and Sept. 16 -- in which hundreds of thousands of protesters from both sides of the political spectrum took to the streets -- show that this analysis is correct.
Then, the next question has to be: What is necessary for the anti-Chen campaign -- ?which must come to a peaceful end -- to develop in a positive direction?
I submit the following three points for consideration.
First, and most importantly, since the campaign has realized that the "live or die" approach leads to violence, that its focus on Chen personally lacks legitimacy, and has shifted its focus to anti-corruption, it should take an honest look at the past corruption in the KMT as well as present and future legislators, regardless of political affiliation.
With a new legislative session just underway, lawmakers from both political camps should be pushed to draw up alternative versions of a "sunshine bill" so that an anti-corruption system can be established as soon as possible.
Second, the Constitution of the Republic of China was hammered out in China and is mostly irrelevant to the daily lives of the Taiwanese people.
The public generally do not have a practical understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of a presidential system versus a Cabinet system, nor do they understand the value of and restrictions to the freedoms of expression and political participation. Having experienced a transfer of political power, it should now be possible to discuss the direction of constitutional and other legal amendments based on the experience of the past decade.
Third, mass demonstrations are not necessarily a good thing for democracy. The current pro and anti-Chen demonstrations are mainly a product of TV and newspaper hype, as the media disregard journalistic professionalism and ethics to intervene directly in the political struggle, showing that Taiwan is an underdeveloped nation from a media perspective.
If Taiwan cannot reform its media, it is almost impossible that the nation will develop in a positive way.
Chen Yi-shen is an associate researcher in the Institute of Modern History at Academia Sinica.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations