This month has not been kind to the family of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). It began somewhat upbeat on Nov. 5 when the Taipei District Court returned a not guilty verdict on charges of corruption and money laundering against Chen and his wife, Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍). The administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) instantly criticized the ruling, saying Chen and Wu had escaped a guilty verdict not because they were innocent, but because of a legal mistake. However, on Nov. 11, Chen and Wu were not so lucky when the Supreme Court upheld two bribery convictions, sentencing them to 11 years and eight years in prison for each charge. A few days later on Nov. 16, the Kaohsiung District Court ruled against Chen’s son, Chen Chih-chung (陳致中), in a libel suit he brought against Next Magazine, which earlier this year accused him of soliciting a prostitute.
Given its long affiliation with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the demise of the Chen family has been a political bonanza for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). No sooner did the court issue its Nov. 5 verdict than the KMT cried foul, declaring anti-corruption a theme for its election rally planned for yesterday. The Nov. 11 decision only increased the KMT’s indignation by confirming the injustice of the first not-guilty verdict.
Spin doctors have also used the Chen family’s misfortune to attack others. When DPP Chairperson and Sinbei City mayoral candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) refused last week to appear in a public debate with her KMT opponent, Eric Chu (朱立倫), Ma accused her of ducking questions about Chen.
The KMT brought unprecedented levels of corruption to Taiwan, so its outrage about the misdeeds of others is laughable, in particular given that Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) of the KMT is embroiled in his own corruption scandal involving construction projects for the Taipei International Flora Expo. These scandals have put a bump in his re--election bid. Unless we believe it is merely a coincidence that the Chen rulings were announced immediately before this week’s special municipality elections, then recent claims that the courts are finally acting independently of KMT control are clearly premature.
However, the DPP still has a problem, which is how to protect itself from the legal and political liabilities attached to its former leader. As a party chairman, a key ideologue, strategist, spokesman and as by far the DPP’s most successful candidate for office — winning the Taipei mayorship and the presidency twice — Chen Shui-bian is so closely identified with the DPP that an attempt to cut ties would only look disingenuous.
It would also be ungrateful. Chen was once dubbed “the son of Taiwan,” a name he most certainly earned. A democratic activist who served time prison during the KMT’s Martial Law era, he worked much of his life to reform a political system that was oppressive and corrupt. His sacrifices and those of his wife are a matter of public record.
Tsai’s response to hostile questions concerning the former president have been precisely correct: She supports Chen Shui-bian’s judicial rights as a citizen under the Constitution and she respects the judicial process in which he is tried. In better times, the former president would have agreed.
However, something more is needed and not just an acknowledgment of Chen Shui-bian’s honorable past. It may be that his greatest legacy will be to show that truly no one is above the law. There is no room for demagogues in democracy; and regardless of how successful, well meaning or momentarily powerful, we are all corruptible. This is the value of adequate checks and balances in the Constitution. It is also why judicial reform should be high on the national agenda.
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS