On Jan. 21, the Supreme Administrative Court rejected an appeal by the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA), affirming the Taipei High Administrative Court’s rejection of a 2006 development plan for a Central Taiwan Science Park site near Cising Farm (七星農場) in Houli Township (后里), Taichung County, based on an environmental impact assessment (EIA). This is the first time the public has won an environmental legal case against the government.
The development plan was supposed to attract major companies, which would be releasing large amounts of waste water into nearby water channels. The National Science Council’s Central Taiwan Science Park administration has been consistently vague and ambiguous in dealing with concerns about toxins and their volumes and concentrations, the reliability of data and whether the already bad air quality would decline further.
The initial EIA review committee was unable to reach a consensus, and simply moved the proceedings to the next stage, saying that the plan had passed, albeit with conditions. It was eventually passed. Local residents, however, were concerned that the plan would seriously impact their livelihoods and health, and took the issue to court.
Even the EIA committee members who supported the development had their reservations, and attached a number of conditions. They said that, “prior to the commencement of operations, the agencies responsible for the development are to provide a health risk assessment ... and should the assessment reveal long-term adverse health effects on the local populace, the said agency shall undertake to unconditionally abandon the development.”
According to Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (環境影響評估法), an EIA “means an environmental management plan ... conducted prior to project implementation in order to determine ... the potential impact ... on the environment, including the living environment, natural environment and social environment.”
On Jan. 23, the EPA expressed its disbelief, saying it thought the Supreme Administrative Court had “misrepresented the EIA regulations,” and that it intended to “stand up for the rights and independence of the assessment committee.”
On Jan. 31, after it had received the verdict, the EPA again came to its own defense, first making it clear that it would be asking the Central Taiwan Science Park administration to put together more data for the EIA committee to consider, and adding that the plan had been given the go-ahead when the Democratic Progressive Party was in power.
The lion’s share of the article, however, was devoted to explaining how the various documents — permits, licenses, approvals — issued by the agency had to “reach some kind of balance between the health and rights of the public, the principle of legitimate expectation of the original legal facilities of the manufacturers in the park and the livelihood of the workers.”
Does this mean that the various permits, licenses and approvals mentioned no longer count? You would have thought the EPA would be pleased to see people standing up for the environment, despite having its own appeal rejected. However, this turned out not to be the case.
With the exception of the reference to “the health and rights of the public,” the EPA’s response makes no mention of the potential impact of this development on the environment and the health of the people. It looks like the EPA is more interested in development than the environment.
Gloria Hsu is a professor at National Taiwan University’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences and a former member of an environmental impact assessment committee.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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
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
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