For civic groups that long hoped for an overhaul of the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), the amendment expected to pass soon is disheartening. It fails to resolve the problems with the law that prompted calls for an amendment in the first place.
From President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) perspective, however, it is the fulfillment of one of his campaign promises. The version of the amendment that is likely to pass — possibly this week — was proposed by the Cabinet.
On Monday, Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said Ma hoped to see the amendment expedited. But if Ma expects to win political currency with his critics through this amendment, he is next in line for disappointment.
Expecting the amendment to pass yesterday, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, the Judicial Reform Foundation and other groups organized a rally outside the legislature. Their message was simple: This version is not what they wanted.
As it turned out, the amendment was postponed and could be put to a vote on Friday. Protesters who had gathered since 8:30am to express their dissatisfaction with the amendment pledged to return.
It was months of intense campaigning by these groups — aided by the concerns of international observers — that necessitated an amendment in the first place. Ignoring the matter is not an option for a government dogged by allegations of undemocratic behavior, ranging from unchecked cross-strait negotiations and suppression of protests during Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin’s (陳雲林) visit last year to meddling in judicial cases and the media. The government has not been able to dispel concerns that human rights and democracy are eroding.
Yet despite repeated promises from the government and legislators, an amendment has been long in coming — and now that it is on the table, it seems sure to be a washout.
The Cabinet’s amendment does not address complaints that the assembly law allows authorities to put limits on or cancel demonstrations and to bar rallies from certain public locations.
The question is who Ma and the legislators that support this amendment think they will appease — the dozens of academics abroad who have expressed concern about developments here; the participants in last year’s Wild Strawberry protests; the Judicial Reform Foundation and other legal experts; or the international organizations that have trained their eyes on Taiwan in the past few months?
None of these believes that the amendment is anything other than show. Surely, the government must know this.
If the amendment passes on Friday, the Cabinet will be more than ready to consider the matter closed, but discontent with the assembly law is not likely to fade.
As the Judicial Reform Foundation said on Monday when inviting the public to yesterday’s rally, it has taken 21 years, two changes of government and countless demonstrations for legislators to reach the point of amending the assembly law.
If the version that passes is pointless, the foundation and others calling for reform will be left wondering how long Taiwan will have to wait for the next chance to appear — and whether that day will produce better results. But despite their disappointment, they are not likely to back down from their position on this fundamental matter.
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