The arrest of Taipei Society (澄社) member Hsu Shih-jung (徐世榮) during protests against the demolition of houses in Dapu Borough (大埔) in Miaoli County’s Jhunan Township (竹南) last month has led to controversy after controversy.
It was neither the first nor the last time that someone was arrested for shouting slogans while President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was present, nor was it even unexpected, and perhaps Hsu’s arrest received more attention because he is a professor.
However, the fact remains that while Taiwan may have been lavished with praise for its democratization over the past 20 years, what this incident tells us is that, as far as the current legal system is concerned, street protests are still treated as if martial law had never been lifted.
The Police Duties Enforcement Act (警察職權行使法) has been amended to expand the rights of police to supervise street protests and, last year, the Special Service Act (特種勤務條例) was amended to give the national security agencies special service rights. The martial law-like treatment of street protests only adds to these laws.
Not a lot of attention was paid when charges were unable to be brought against the military police, who exceeded their powers, after protesters were injured in demonstrations during the visit by then-Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) in 2008. However, with the help of pro bono lawyers, Hsu is now filing charges against top-level police officials and the head of the National Security Bureau rather than directing his charges against low-level police officers.
In addition to highlighting the longstanding mistreatment of street protests by prosecutors, police and national security, this also calls for further consideration of the absurd implications of the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法) that currently governs street protests.
In any normal democracy, assembly, demonstrations and the shouting of slogans are the humble means left to disadvantaged groups that want to organize and make their voice heard in society and to put pressure on the government. This is not only about freedom of expression by shouting slogans and freedom of assembly by way of organizing; in a democracy, these actions are also the public’s last resort when they want to protest against the government. This is why constantly charging people with offenses against public safety clearly amounts to applying a martial law mindset to the handling of street protests.
In the same way, if, on one hand, the government is allowed to hold on to the Assembly and Parade Act, a remnant of the Martial Law era, and use it to protect itself or the relationship between it and industry, while on the other hand, it continues to brainwash the public by stressing the need for social order, then everyone will become captive to the government’s omnipresent ideology. We will have to continue to be satisfied with the restricted freedom that comes as a result of the Assembly and Parade Act, whose final goal is to restrict freedom.
Any time something runs counter to public interest or justice and we want to put pressure on the government, we will have to rely on the hope that anyone who initiates a protest will be able to mobilize sufficient numbers of protesters while at the same time being able to meet various unreasonable demands when applying for permission to hold an activity.
When we can no longer wait because public interest has been devastated and justice destroyed, the absurd version of democracy that we are left with will not be what you or I want.
Liu Ching-yi is a professor in the Graduate Institute of National Development at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95