The government is planning to sign a cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China. This is a major agreement that will have a major influence on the nation’s long-term development. It will affect not only the economy and trade, but also other areas such as sovereignty, democracy, society, culture, gender issues and environmental protection.
The impact of the agreement will not be limited to what Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) called “the greatest redistribution of wealth in Taiwan,” as it will probably involve an overall restructuring of Taiwanese society. This is why academics and non-governmental organizations have joined forces and initiated a campaign called “Strive for Justice.”
A few days ago, a proposal to hold a referendum asking the public whether they wanted the government to sign an ECFA with China was submitted to the Cabinet’s Referendum Review Committee for review. The committee is expected to make a decision early next month.
Because the Referendum Act (公民投票法) rules out referendums on tax and investment issues and the government bills an ECFA as purely a trade and economic issue, the committee will very likely reject the proposal. This is another reason behind the formation of the “Strive for Justice” campaign.
Through this campaign, the organizers hope to demonstrate and convince the referendum review committee that an ECFA is not purely a tax and investment agreement, but rather a major policy that should be decided through a plebiscite. The organizers aim to compile a list of reasons for supporting a referendum by encouraging people from all walks of life to put forward their reasons — based on their experience and expertise — for demanding that the issue be decided in a referendum.
Democracy is Taiwan’s most valuable asset, and referendums are one way through which democracy is put into practice. Although the Referendum Act is impractical, we hope to compile a comprehensive set of reasons, with the help of the public, to persuade the committee to accept the referendum proposal.
In the course of launching this campaign, we have thought hard and long about the issues — whether an ECFA constitutes a major policy, whether the government should provide the public with more information, and whether it is reasonable to demand that the issue be decided in a referendum.
In other words, we are practicing democratic deliberation. This is also why we are hoping that everyone who is concerned about the nation’s future will take part by writing down the reasons why they support a referendum on an ECFA and send it to the Platform for the Defense of Taiwanese Democracy at tdw2012@gmail.com. Additional information about the campaign is available at www.twdem.org.
Yen Chueh-an is a law professor at National Taiwan University and convener of the Platform for the Defense of Taiwanese Democracy.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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