Taiwanese human rights advocates were joined by several foreign counterparts on Thursday in calling for an independent national human rights commission to be established, one that actually has the power to conduct investigations. However, their appeal will likely end up being just another statement in a debate about commissions that goes back decades.
There has been talk about establishing an official rights commission since January 2000, shortly before the first transfer of power from a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration. The key sticking point over the years has been whether such a commission would be an independent agency or part of the government and, if the latter, which branch of government should administer it.
The gulf between the pan-blue and pan-green camps has also been a hindrance, as it has been since the late 1970s, when the then-KMT government pre-empted opposition moves to create a non-government organization (NGO) for human rights by establishing the Chinese Human Rights Association in 1979.
In those days there could only be one organization for any specific activity registered with the government and so the first one to register became the de facto NGO and applications by subsequent groups for recognition were denied, whether it was a women’s group or labor union. This forced the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, established by members of the tangwai (黨外, outside the party), to operate illegally until it was able to win recognition in 1995.
Fourteen years ago, the Chinese Human Rights Association argued that the work of a rights commission should focus on educating the public and advising the government. It also thought the commission should be placed under its remit. While the association had been active in promoting human rights, it was still seen as very much a pro-KMT group.
Others felt such a commission should produce annual reports on the state of human rights in Taiwan and create a human rights index for the nation. Still others wanted a commission that would be empowered to investigate abuses of the White Terror era.
Early on in former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) time in office, there was an effort to establish a national commission that could investigate rights abuses, issue annual reports, suggest amendments to improve legal protection of citizens’ rights and push for Taiwan’s participation in international human-rights associations. Those efforts went nowhere in the face of KMT legislative intransigence.
In 2009, the legislature ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) signed them into law.
Ma marked Human Rights Day in 2010 by establishing an 18-member human rights commission under the leadership of then-vice president Vincent Siew (蕭萬長). The commission was made up of four government officials, including Siew, and 14 rights “experts.” Ma said it would establish rights policies and produce annual reports. However, it had no authority to investigate or review human rights violations.
Any complaints about the built-in ineffectiveness of the new organization were countered by officials noting that the Cabinet already had a task force to promote human rights, while the Control Yuan had its own human rights protection commission.
Four years on and Taiwan still lacks a national human rights institution worthy of its name or one that conforms to the Paris Principles adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1993. Those principles call for a rights institution that is funded by a nation’s government, but is independent of it. Such a body reviews complaints about rights violations, assists in transitional justice processes and helps in the development of democratic institutions.
If it is up to the KMT, Taiwan will wait a long time for a true rights commission, one that has teeth.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS