The Public Television Service (PTS) budget bill has pitted Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators against PTS and the clash between the two sides is becoming more and more serious.
This is no longer a conflict between the pan-blue and pan-green political parties, but a matter of political intervention in the management of PTS.
Media freedom is an essential foundation for democratic politics and it is protected by Article 11 of the Constitution, which reads: “The people shall have freedom of speech, teaching, writing and publication.”
Constitutional interpretations 364, 613 and 623 also stress the importance of protecting media freedom. The major reason why media freedom is protected by the Constitution is that the communication and broadcast media serve as a medium and a platform for public opinion and, in democratically and constitutionally ruled countries, they supervise the state authorities and political parties.
Media freedom does not only mean passively preventing intervention by the authorities, but also actively demanding that legislators assume their obligations to legislate and set up systems, procedures and regulations aimed at preventing information monopolies and ensuring the expression and spread of diversified public opinion, thus creating a free forum for social debate.
The media is of such great importance that any dictatorial regime wants to control it and manipulate its content and direction by any possible means. The autonomy of the communication and broadcast media has thus become the most important part of the protection of media freedom.
The question of whether such autonomy is protected has become an important index for the democratic development of a country. Based on this concern, political parties and the government withdrew from the management of electronic media outlets and PTS was established during Taiwan’s democratization process.
Compared with commercial TV stations, PTS is run as a non-profit organization with a mission to serve the public. As such, in a way it serves to maintain the survival of the communication and broadcasting media.
In order to continue this mission and avoid intervention by the government, corporations and other interest groups, legislators must devote themselves to protecting the independence and autonomy of the PTS’ operations, both legally and financially.
When PTS was first established, the situation did not allow it to levy license fees on subscribers as, for example, the BBC, the public broadcasting system in Germany and NHK do.
Therefore, in terms of financial protection, not only does PTS need to source its own financial resources, but the government also needs to provide it with certain subsidies to organize cultural activities. The purpose of these subsidies is to protect the independence and autonomy of PTS’ operations so that it can carry out the aforementioned constitutional obligations, rather than to provide the government or political parties with an opportunity to intervene in PTS’ programming.
If political parties or politicians were to intervene in the management of PTS by way of its budget, it would clearly be unconstitutional.
In addition, Taiwan’s media environment would return to the Martial Law era and the government would then become the target of international censure.
Chen Yaw-shyang is an assistant professor in the Department of Public Administration and Policy at National Taipei University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS