With great fanfare, Vice President Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) on Friday evening invited Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) and Miaoli County Commissioner Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻) to discuss the pending demolition of four farmers’ houses in Dapu (大埔), Miaoli County. The conclusion of the meeting was merely to call on Liu to “handle the matter appropriately” in accordance with previous decisions of the urban and rural planning division of the Ministry of the Interior. By passing the buck back to the county government, central government has once again demonstrated its ineptitude.
The Executive Yuan negotiations on Aug. 17, 2010, concluded that the houses should be preserved in their existing location. Jiang, then minister of the interior, attended the meeting and knows that the four principles concerning traffic safety and public safety, which he has come up with since, were neither discussed nor recorded at the 2010 meeting.
Jiang is just using this as a smokescreen for his negligent handling of the issue in 2010.
On July 17, 2010, farmers and their supporters from Dapu and other areas held an all-night protest on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. I accompanied representatives of the farmers’ self-help association to the Executive Yuan to negotiate. Wu, then premier, informed us of a plan to preserve the farmers’ houses in the existing location and compensate them with adjoining land. He urged then-Cabinet secretary-general Lin Join-sane (林中森) to give the departments concerned one month to come up with proposals to that effect.
On Aug. 26, Lin wrote to the Ministry of the Interior and the Miaoli County Government, saying: “After meeting with representatives of the protesting farmers for a second time on Aug. 17, we reached the preliminary conclusion that the buildings and the land on which they are built should be preserved in their present locations [and that] the property should be handled by means of special-case transfer or sale. Now I request the Ministry of the Interior to keep pressing the Miaoli County Government to handle the matter appropriately, as soon as possible.”
On Sept. 15, the Ministry of the Interior wrote to the Miaoli County Government saying: “The results of the aforementioned negotiations require the Miaoli County Government to cooperate by changing the urban plan, adjusting the zone expropriation and presenting the plan to the Executive Yuan for approval of transfer or sale in accordance with Article 44, Paragraph 1-4 of the Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例). Please proceed promptly.”
This series of events should prove that Jiang’s so-called four principles are a complete fabrication.
If the Executive Yuan, as the nation’s Cabinet and highest executive authority, has lawfully exercised the powers exclusively invested in it, then how can subordinate bodies like the Interior Ministry’s urban and rural planning division and local governments overturn its instructions or add their own conditions and restrictions?
When Jiang was minister of the interior, he also served as director of the urban and rural planning division. While he never attended its meetings to direct its handling of this issue, he exceeded his powers by examining the special-case transfer or sale plan that had been approved by the Executive Yuan. In doing so, he undermined the work Wu had done to assuage public discontent, which is why the government now faces a new wave of public anger and media pressure.
Now Wu and Jiang are asking Liu to handle the matter “appropriately,” though he can hardly be trusted to do so. This government really is completely hopeless.
Chan Shun-kuei is a lawyer.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Chinese actor Alan Yu (于朦朧) died after allegedly falling from a building in Beijing on Sept. 11. The actor’s mysterious death was tightly censored on Chinese social media, with discussions and doubts about the incident quickly erased. Even Hong Kong artist Daniel Chan’s (陳曉東) post questioning the truth about the case was automatically deleted, sparking concern among overseas Chinese-speaking communities about the dark culture and severe censorship in China’s entertainment industry. Yu had been under house arrest for days, and forced to drink with the rich and powerful before he died, reports said. He lost his life in this vicious
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
In South Korea, the medical cosmetic industry is fiercely competitive and prices are low, attracting beauty enthusiasts from Taiwan. However, basic medical risks are often overlooked. While sharing a meal with friends recently, I heard one mention that his daughter would be going to South Korea for a cosmetic skincare procedure. I felt a twinge of unease at the time, but seeing as it was just a casual conversation among friends, I simply reminded him to prioritize safety. I never thought that, not long after, I would actually encounter a patient in my clinic with a similar situation. She had
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
RSS