As it becomes clear that President Chen Shui-bian (
Given the scale of the problem, Taiwanese may have to decide whether they are ready to condemn not just a handful of government officials, but perhaps hundreds or even thousands of them for continuing the outdated but widespread practice of drawing from special allowance funds.
Last week, Premier Su Tseng-chang (
Shih and the Ministry of Justice were criticized for suggesting in a press release that prosecutors should adopt a more lenient approach in investigating government officials' use of the funds. In particular, Shih's release suggested sidestepping the issue of what officials did with the portion of their funds that did not require receipts for reimbursement. The release went as far as to suggest that the funds should be treated as "substantial subsidy" to government officials.
The ministry's release was immediately rebutted by prosecutors Eric Chen (
This is not a legal question but a political question. The nation's prosecutors have the discretion and power to enforce the law, but they cannot make it. The nature of the funds and whether they are in fact intended to subsidize the income of officials are issues that must first be resolved based on the intent of the relevant legislation.
For the ministry -- or for Shih in his capacity as justice minister -- to issue a statement suggesting a course of action for prosecutors was entirely inappropriate, especially because the ministry was the supervising body for the nation's prosecutors. The press release could be interpreted as providing the prosecutors with guidance on how they should investigate specific cases.
Around the same time the press release was issued, Su was criticized for stating that no one is at fault or should be blamed for the controversies surrounding the use of the special allowance funds.
Su is a politician who does not directly supervise prosecutors, so the appearance of impropriety is less obvious in his case.
In particular, if Su was making a political statement rather than issuing instructions or orders as the nation's premier, then the message that he was trying to convey is not entirely without merit.
In any event, the issue of the special allowance funds will first require a political remedy rather than a legal one. The system must be reformed from the roots up, and the political system -- not the judicial system -- is the proper avenue for accomplishing such reform.
The political process does not occur in a vacuum. Political leaders must listen to those they serve -- the voters -- when they decide whether the practice of special allowance funds should be continued.
If the public and their representatives decide to continue the system, it must be reformed to make it legitimate and lawful. There should be no more gray areas or loopholes that politicians can take advantage of.
After the political process has performed its function, then it will be time to move on to the more sensitive and difficult issue of what to do with officials who have misused their special allowance funds.
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