It is a rarity when pan-green and pan-blue lawmakers can see eye to eye on an issue — and the Government Information Office’s (GIO) recent failure to discipline a Toronto-based official over his alleged verbal escapades marks just such an occasion.
Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英), director of the information division at the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office in Toronto, was accused by Democratic Progressive Party lawmakers and a group of relentless Internet users of writing articles defaming Taiwan and Taiwanese people under the pen name “Fan Lan-chin” (范蘭欽).
Despite findings by GIO ethics personnel that suggested there was a “substantial gap” between the gathered evidence and Kuo’s side of the story, Kuo received a demotion to a “non-managerial” post before his case was transferred to the Commission of Disciplinary Sanctions of Functionaries (公務人員懲戒委員會) in the Judicial Yuan.
The GIO claimed it processed the Kuo case in accordance with the law — one of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) favorite refrains. However, if that were really the case, Kuo would have been handed more than just a demotion.
For starters, Article 4 of the Act on Discipline of Civil Servants (公務人員懲戒法) stipulates that when the disciplinary commission deems a case at hand “a grave issue,” the individual involved must be immediately placed on temporary suspension.
A case of this magnitude clearly constitutes a “grave issue” — an overseas civil officer is alleged to have posted hateful articles on a Web site defaming at least one of the nation’s ethnic groups, claiming ethnic Taiwanese people deserve to be wiped out by Chinese Communists and calling ethnic Taiwanese derogatory names. If the commission members disagree, they are advised to revisit the Constitution, where Article 5 says: “All ethnic groups are equal in the Republic of China.”
Fielding questions on the legislative floor on Tuesday, Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) said Kuo’s freedom of speech needed to be taken into consideration while the case is reviewed.
It is dumbfounding to hear the nation’s highest administrative official confusing hateful language with freedom of speech.
British diplomat Rowan Laxton was arrested last month for allegedly shouting anti-Semitic remarks and a Canadian man was convicted in Quebec and sentenced to a six-month prison term in 2007 for engaging in hate propaganda with the creation and management of a Web site that featured racist and anti-Semitic articles and music.
In some European countries, hate speech and Holocaust denial are criminal offenses.
“We will endeavor to create an environment that is humane, rational and pluralistic — one that fosters political reconciliation and co-existence. We will promote harmony among sub-ethnic groups and between the old and new immigrants,” Ma solemnly said in his inauguration speech 10 months ago.
So far, however, we have heard neither Ma nor the Presidential Office issue any condemnation on this issue on their own initiative. We have only had a mild word from Minister of Foreign Affairs Francisco Ou (歐鴻鍊), who called the articles allegedly written by Kuo “inappropriate.”
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS