With the beginning of the new legislative session and details of the investigation into the improper lobbying and wiretapping case involving Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) being revealed little by little, the public is finally getting an idea of the full extent of the controversy and the political maneuvers behind it.
Prosecutor-General Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) appeared to be in trouble when the Presidential Office proclaimed that “anything that went beyond the red line of the judiciary would not be tolerated” — a move that sets up Huang as a scapegoat for the wiretapping and the plotting that attempted to force Wang from his legislator-at-large seat.
Huang’s exit would seem to be necessary. He had led a Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Special Investigation Division’s (SID) investigation which resorted to wiretapping not only Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘), but also the Legislative Yuan’s switchboard and one of his own prosecutors, Lin Shiow-tao (林秀濤). Adding his improper report about wiretapped conversations to President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九), Huang clearly violated the Constitution.
However, Ma’s role in the scandal should not be ignored. If Huang has to be held accountable for his abuse of power, Ma should also be responsible for the current political turmoil and, most importantly, his own undermining of constitutional procedures.
While Ma has repeatedly said that the entire incident — the wiretapping of Ker and Wang, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) revoking Wang’s party membership — was neither a conspiracy nor politically motivated, Huang’s testimony at a legislature’s question-and-answer session revealed that he had met with Ma twice on, Aug. 31 and Sept. 1, with the latter meeting requested by the president.
The two met five days before the investigation was closed, violating the principle of secrecy of investigation. And while Ma and Huang tried to “put out the fire” by explaining that they were investigating a case of administrative misconduct rather than criminal activities, a meeting of this type between a president and a prosecutor-general was still improper.
Ma’s use of wiretaps on his political rivals is not surprising, since the KMT long used surveillance as part of its ruling strategy. Ma himself spied on Taiwanese students on US campuses during the 1970s when he attended Harvard University. His history demonstrates the irony of Ma’s 2008 promise that no political and illegal wiretapping would be allowed under his administration.
Politically motivated wiretapping is intolerable because it infringes on people’s constitutional right to private communication.
The gravity of this controversy does not come from the alleged improper lobbying by Wang or even from the vicious infighting within the KMT, neither of which directly threatens the rule of law. Instead the gravity lies in Ma going beyond the “red line” of the constitutional separation of powers by meeting Huang and holding a televised press conference as president to denounce the legislative speaker, while Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) and Vice President Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) looked on.
As of now Huang insists that he will not offer an apology, arguing that the fate of Jiang and Ma would be bundled together with his own.
However, all signs point to Huang’s becoming another “Yu Wen” (余文), a reference to the Taipei City staffer who served nine months in jail for failing to keep Ma’s special allowance funds as Taipei mayor in order. Yu was widely seen as a sacrificial lamb.
Ma should not be able to avoid taking responsibility this time by having someone else take the blame. There is enough solid evidence to prove that Ma’s foul play put at risk constitutional mechanisms. He is advised to apologize and step down.
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
After thousands of Taiwanese fans poured into the Tokyo Dome to cheer for Taiwan’s national team in the World Baseball Classic’s (WBC) Pool C games, an image of food and drink waste left at the stadium said to have been left by Taiwanese fans began spreading on social media. The image sparked wide debate, only later to be revealed as an artificially generated image. The image caption claimed that “Taiwanese left trash everywhere after watching the game in Tokyo Dome,” and said that one of the “three bad habits” of Taiwanese is littering. However, a reporter from a Japanese media outlet
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework