As expected, the Executive Yuan’s Referendum Review Committee yesterday, for the third time, rejected the Taiwan Solidarity Union’s (TSU) proposal on holding a referendum on the cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). This is also the third time the absurd situation has arisen in Taiwan’s democracy where a handful of Referendum Review Committee members have struck down a collective wish petitioned by more than 300,000 people who want a public vote on the government’s trade pact with China.
While the Referendum Review Committee members may argue they were simply doing their job in accordance with the Referendum Act (公民投票法), which bestows upon them the authority to screen referendum proposals, the truth is that the Referendum Act has not been nicknamed “Birdcage Referendum Act” for no reason. It is a law that was flawed from the start when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-controlled legislature passed it eight years ago.
The Referendum Act is the only one of its kind in the world, a law according to which a ridiculous committee was designed as an anti-democratic organ under the executive branch to filter out the public’s voices and hijack their right to direct democracy.
Following the latest rejection from the committee, the TSU has said that it will immediately propose another referendum seeking to abolish the review committee.
The proposal will likely stir up another ruckus, given the party of concern will be the review committee itself. However, this is just the kind of provocation needed to highlight the ludicrousness of the “Birdcage Referendum Act.”
Aside from the absurd existence of the Referendum Review Committee, the current Referendum Act is also notorious for its excessively high thresholds, which make it almost impossible for any kind of initiative launched by the public to succeed.
Some may recall how Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) mentioned in October last year that the Executive Yuan would look into the possibility of lowering the threshold for referendums.
Months later, no further progress has been seen in that regard.
It hasn’t been a week since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), in his New Year’s address, said that the various reforms this country have seen “have made the Republic of China a paragon of political and economic progress for developing nations around the world and have dispelled the myth that democracy is unsuitable for a Chinese society.”
The very existence of the Referendum Review Committee and the limit it imposes on the nation’s democracy shows the falseness of this statement.
If the Ma administration is serious about debunking the myth that “democracy is unsuitable for a Chinese society,” it should display its full resolve by initiating an amendment to the Referendum Act and providing an avenue by which the public can exercise direct democracy without all the hoops and hurdles. The current Referendum Act only constrains and disenfranchises people of their right to direct democracy as enshrined in the Constitution.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Keelung Mayor George Hsieh (謝國樑) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Tuesday last week apologized over allegations that the former director of the city’s Civil Affairs Department had illegally accessed citizens’ data to assist the KMT in its campaign to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) councilors. Given the public discontent with opposition lawmakers’ disruptive behavior in the legislature, passage of unconstitutional legislation and slashing of the central government’s budget, civic groups have launched a massive campaign to recall KMT lawmakers. The KMT has tried to fight back by initiating campaigns to recall DPP lawmakers, but the petition documents they
RSS