Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his wife Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍) have recently come under intense moral and political scrutiny for depositing funds in overseas bank accounts.
Unfortunately, Taiwan still does not have a complete set of laws and regulations governing such actions. While visiting diplomatic allies in Central and South America, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), a former student of law, came out with the surprising comment that “this affair brings to mind former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos.”
It was hardly appropriate for him to compare present day Taiwan to a dictatorship of more than 20 years ago. In his eagerness to attack his political adversary, Ma overlooked the fact that the political associates of Marcos’ successor, Corazon Aquino, were no less hungry for riches than their predecessors. “People’s power” in the Philippines failed to usher in clean government — surely not the best analogy for Ma to choose for his own rise to power.
In 1986, Marcos was exposed as having hundreds of millions of US dollars invested in the US, and was driven from power by a popular movement. All the presidents who have come after him became embroiled in corruption and fraud once they entered office.
Despite graduating with a law degree in the US — where she was a classmate of former US president Bill Clinton — incumbent Philippine President Gloria Arroyo has not been able to avoid questions and protests over her alleged overseas bank accounts. The Philippines has suffered unending political turbulence, with its economy making no noticeable progress over nearly four decades — an example that other developing countries would be well advised not to follow.
Ma made a regrettable error when he chose to apply the analogy of the Philippines, with its chronic internal wastage, to Taiwan, not because Chen cannot be compared to Ferdinand Marcos, but because Ma’s own record and that of his party — the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — are also tainted.
The KMT lost government control in 2000 partly because of its history of corruption. What has it done to clean up its act in the ensuing eight years, and what is it going to do in the next four years? For all this time, the KMT has retained a majority in the legislature.
Why, then, is Taiwan’s anti-corruption “sunshine” legislation still too dim and fragmented to cast a light into every dark corner?
While the political arena is still ruled by the law of the jungle, making it a place where those with the most resources call the shots and the weak go to the wall, it is sheer malice for Ma and the KMT to mock and accuse their opponents of corruption. A party that is unwilling to judge each and every politician by the same standard is not qualified to bear the banner of “corruption fighter.”
Regarding the question of whether Chen and Wu have broken the law, our view is that the authorities handling the case should prove their worth to the public by conducting a thorough investigation without prejudice. At the same time, however, the same standards should be applied to all political figures regardless of party affiliation, including the president.
In the course of various elections, all these politicians have received donations great and small. Can they account for their true electoral incomes and expenditures and what happened to funds that were left over at the end of the campaign? Did the surplus funds end up in their personal accounts or those of their family members? During their terms in office, did they have any quid pro quo arrangements with their donors? Did the politicians’ incomes increase out of proportion to their salaries? Did they maintain overseas bank accounts?
The system needs to be strengthened to clarify these questions and prevent abuses. A superficial approach is not good enough.
The KMT has held a dominant position in the legislature over the past eight years. During Ma’s tenure as KMT chairman, his party proposed four “sunshine laws,” while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) put forward nine such bills. However, the legislature’s efficiency in passing these bills has been singularly unimpressive, while their content also leaves a lot to be desired.
Not only have the DPP’s bills been blocked — even the Political Party Law (政黨法) proposed by Ma is still on the drawing board, stymied by the issue of party assets. Although three bills — the Political Donation Law (政治獻金法), the Public Servants’ Property Declaration Law (公職人員財產申報法) and the Lobby Law (遊說法) — have finally passed their third reading after many delays, they have been widely condemned as having too many loopholes and being tailored to suit the interests of certain parties. The way this anti-graft legislation has been handled does not suggest the presence of humility or self-restraint among our politicians.
For example, take the Political Donation Law. The section seeking to fix an upper limit for political parties’ financial contributions to individual candidates was opposed outright by the KMT, and the item was not included in the law. The aim of the proposal was to set a basic standard to stop elections being unfairly swayed by pouring in party funds, but it was stopped in its tracks.
Another example: Prompted by the current allegations against Chen, KMT lawmakers have proposed as priority legislation for the next session the drafting of a law forbidding politicians from holding wealth whose source cannot be fully explained. In fact, the matter already came up last year when the draft Public Servants’ Property Declaration Law was finally tabled for debate in the legislature.
How can the KMT explain that when the DPP advocated imposing criminal penalties on officials who could not account for dubious income, it forced through a clause imposing administrative financial penalties only? Shouldn’t the KMT have dealt with the matter last year, instead of trying to simply close the stable door after the horse had bolted? Apart from Chen, how many craftier horses are out there, with no chance of being caught?
Article 20 of the UN Convention against Corruption, which came into force in 2003, stipulates that a public official whose expenditure and lifestyle do not conform to his or her lawful income should offer an explanation for this, and if it is clear that the official has gained illegal income through corruption or fraud, this should be sufficient grounds for prosecution, even in the absence of conclusive evidence. How many of our politicians would pass muster if scrutinized according to the spirit of the UN Charter?
Ma has declared that he is prepared to take full responsibility for his actions. We suggest that he refrain from short-sighted political manipulation, clean up his party’s act and work to establish a healthy and transparent system of government.
Can the KMT shed the burden of its party assets? Will a full set of “sunshine laws” be passed without undue delay? These are the questions everyone is asking. If the answer is no, then every politician will be, if not a criminal, then at least an accomplice to the crime.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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