Human Rights Day was Dec. 10 and this year it also marked the 30th anniversary of the 1979 Kaohsiung Incident.
Some media commentators lamented the fact that many Taiwanese fail to recognize the importance of this key event in the history of human rights in Taiwan, or have forgotten about it entirely. At the same time, while two international human rights covenants — the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights — have just come into effect in Taiwan, this significant event seems to have been overshadowed by clashes over the Jingmei Human Rights and Cultural Park. What role should the human rights that those in government are promising really play in today’s Taiwan?
If human rights are really to become a deep-rooted part of Taiwan’s culture, the government needs to set an example by putting those rights into practice, and this must be part of the government’s policies and day-to-day work. Otherwise, government officials’ gestures will be seen as a means of stalling the country’s search for historical truth and genuine reconciliation, instead imposing a certain historical mindset.
In that case, the apologies that are made year after year will contribute nothing to making human rights a reality and establishing them as part of our culture. Instead, rights will become no more than moral baubles, an easy substitute for making substantial change. Human rights will gradually become ineffective and people will become numb to the whole concept, or even find it repellent.
In order for human rights to become truly embedded in a country’s society and culture, the change has to start with checks on government power. In reality, however, the government’s review of existing laws in relation to the two covenants avoids important issues, while dwelling on the trivial, as does its list of more than 200 flaws in existing legislation.
It is a typical example of policy under President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government. One has to worry how determined this government really is to put human rights into effect.
The Presidential Office has announced that it intends to establish a human rights advisory committee, but in the meantime the government seems to have completely forgotten about the need to review the security measures it took during last year’s meeting between Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) and his Chinese counterpart, Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) — measures that severely restricted basic human rights protected by the two covenants.
The government appears unwilling to explain what consideration is being given to human rights as it implements security measures for the Chiang-Chen talks in Taichung this week.
The first test of a country’s human rights is its government’s treatment of its own people. When a government fails to take basic human rights as its starting point when dealing with the expression of dissident opinion and with demonstrations, then however many reviews it carries out of existing laws and whatever it does to educate the public about human rights, the gestures are laughable.
Who can have faith in a government that, in its negotiations with China, brushes aside proposals for human rights protection clauses in accords and fails to make the details of negotiations public, thereby denying the legislature’s right to oversight?
If the government doesn’t even care about simple rights such as these, the human rights it talks about are in danger of being traded away by politicians in their under-the-table deals.
Liu Ching-yi is associate professor of law in the Graduate Institute of National Development at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
The government and local industries breathed a sigh of relief after Shin Kong Life Insurance Co last week said it would relinquish surface rights for two plots in Taipei’s Beitou District (北投) to Nvidia Corp. The US chip-design giant’s plan to expand its local presence will be crucial for Taiwan to safeguard its core role in the global artificial intelligence (AI) ecosystem and to advance the nation’s AI development. The land in dispute is owned by the Taipei City Government, which in 2021 sold the rights to develop and use the two plots of land, codenamed T17 and T18, to the
US President Donald Trump has announced his eagerness to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-un while in South Korea for the APEC summit. That implies a possible revival of US-North Korea talks, frozen since 2019. While some would dismiss such a move as appeasement, renewed US engagement with North Korea could benefit Taiwan’s security interests. The long-standing stalemate between Washington and Pyongyang has allowed Beijing to entrench its dominance in the region, creating a myth that only China can “manage” Kim’s rogue nation. That dynamic has allowed Beijing to present itself as an indispensable power broker: extracting concessions from Washington, Seoul
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Taiwan’s labor force participation rate among people aged 65 or older was only 9.9 percent for 2023 — far lower than in other advanced countries, Ministry of Labor data showed. The rate is 38.3 percent in South Korea, 25.7 percent in Japan and 31.5 percent in Singapore. On the surface, it might look good that more older adults in Taiwan can retire, but in reality, it reflects policies that make it difficult for elderly people to participate in the labor market. Most workplaces lack age-friendly environments, and few offer retraining programs or flexible job arrangements for employees older than 55. As