A student-led movement has revealed the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) innate authoritarianism. President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government has offered absolutely no substantive response to the student movement’s civic demands.
The students evacuated the legislative chamber peacefully, but there is no end in sight to the score-settling that has followed; plainclothes police have waved down taxis to send students home; the Cabinet version of the act for regulating the oversight of cross-strait agreements is tantamount to no oversight at all, just as the birdcage Referendum Act (公民投票法) means no referendums; the adjustment to the high-school curriculum encouraged the publishers of certain textbooks to accuse the opposition of confusing national identity and the Ma administration is supporting this attempt at brainwashing based on the freedom of expression; last week there were reports that GRETAI Securities Market had terminated the contract for the company that handled the students’ fundraising platform ahead of time.
There are still lots of demonstrations and there have even been proposals that would restrict rights allowed under the Parade and Assembly Act (集會遊行法). On May 13, the KMT wanted to force through an amendment to the Civil Servants Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法) to increase protection for pan-blue legislators who have upset the public.
All these actions make it clear that the government ignores public opinion at will and no one knows how far it is prepared to go.
The party’s behavior over the amendment to the Civil Servants Election and Recall Act revealed its true colors. One of the main reasons why Ma with his infamous 9 percent approval rating wants to use the power offered by his KMT chairmanship to control the party’s legislative majority is that he does not want legislators to fear acting against their conscience — the amendment to the Civil Servants Election and Recall Act being a case in point.
According to the act, those calling for the recall of a civil servant and those who sign a document to that purpose only have to provide their name, ID number and household registration address.
The amendment proposed by the KMT, however, adds requirements that those who call for the recall of a civil servant and those who sign that call must also attach an affidavit and a copy of their ID card.
The intent behind this change is to make it more difficult to recall someone. If this amendment is passed, these legislators can continue to carry out Ma’s will to the end, without having to fear being recalled while at the same time currying favor with Ma by doing his bidding, and translating that into future political rewards.
The amendment and the recent nominations of members to the Control Yuan are probably being used by the Ma administration to incite an even bigger political storm.
Most of Ma’s nominations for a seat on the Control Yuan have served him well in the past and they will now be charged with seeing to it that Ma does not become the target of score-settling.
Anyone who has the skills required for their jobs but has made Ma look bad can just pack up their things and leave.
Even worse, outgoing Control Yuan President Wang Chien-hsien (王建煊) has ordered that the Control Yuan members who impeached Control Yuan Secretary-General Chen Feng-yi (陳豐義) for destroying documents in a way that violated the Archives Act (檔案法) be investigated. Ma decided on his nominations by looking at who supports him.
Wang, who has said in public that his biggest regret was that he accepted the Control Yuan presidency, has followed suit and done what he can to trample on those Control Yuan members that Ma discarded. Are they trying to set an example for the new Control Yuan nominees?
While all this has been going on, the Cabinet announced that it will hold a national conference on trade and the economy in July.
Taiwan’s current political stalemate is no longer only about the economy and trade.
While the opaque handling of the service trade agreement has angered the public, the problem with the agreement is that our lame-duck president is using his party to lead the government and force its legislators to do his bidding, which has put him on a collision course with public opinion.
In September last year, Ma tried to get rid of Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), thereby interfering directly with the legislature and destroying the balance between the executive and the legislative branches of the government.
At that time, Central Election Commission (CEC, 中央選舉委員會) Chairwoman Chang Po-ya (張博雅) abandoned administrative neutrality by rapidly canceling Wang’s party membership.
Although the KMT lost the lawsuit filed by Wang, Chang was nominated for the Control Yuan presidency. The public can decide for themselves whether this was a political reward.
Lest we forget, to protect the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City, and the pan-blue legislators, the KMT brazenly refused to amend the Referendum Act and lower the quorum threshold while raising the threshold for recalling legislators in order to protect “Ma’s pawns.”
Ma continues to play his power games despite an approval rating of only 9 percent and tramples all over the true masters of a democratic country. Why is he able to do this? The problem clearly lies with the workings of the constitutional framework.
As long as the constitutional articles that benefit the KMT are not amended, the KMT can continue to ignore public opinion and still maintain a legislative majority, allowing Ma to use the power and money provided by the party to continue his authoritarian rule regardless of how low his support drops.
The Sunflower movement hit the nail on the head with its call for a civic constitutional conference.
However, lame-duck Ma will not voluntarily give up power and hand it back to the masters of the nation. Instead, Ma will hold a national conference on trade and the economy to cover up the infection in the Constitution, yet another trick aimed at deceiving the public.
Ma continues to take advantage of the public, and what can we do? If a revolution or a coup is not the rational solution, then we should display the power of the citizenry and occupy the legislative chamber via the ballot box, restore its democratic functions and reorganize constitutional order.
Translated by Perry Svensson
In a Facebook post on Wednesday last week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) wrote: “The KMT must fall for Taiwan to improve.’ Allow me to ask the question again: Is this really true?” It matters not how many times Hsu asks the question, my answer will always be the same: “Yes, the KMT must be toppled for Taiwan to improve.” In the lengthy Facebook post, titled “What were those born in the 1980s guilty of?” Hsu harked back to the idealistic aspirations of the 2014 Sunflower movement before heaping opprobrium on the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP)
The scuffle between Chinese embassy staffers in Fiji and a Taiwanese diplomat at a Republic of China (ROC) Double Ten National Day celebration has turned into a public relations opportunity for the government, Beijing and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Although the incident occurred on Oct. 8, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) downplayed it, only for the story to be picked up by the foreign media, forcing the ministry to respond. The public and opposition parties asked why the government had failed to remonstrate more strongly in the first instance. It is still unclear whether the ministry missed a trick
US President Donald Trump and his Democratic rival, former US vice president Joe Biden, are holding their final debate tonight. In their foreign policy debate, China is sure to be a major issue of contention for the two candidates. Here are several questions the moderator should pose to the candidates: For both: In the first televised US presidential debates in 1960, then-Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy and his Republican counterpart, Richard Nixon, were asked whether the US should intervene if communist China attacked Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu. Kennedy said no, unless the main island of Taiwan was also attacked.
For most of us, the colorful, otherworldly marinescapes of coral reefs are as remote as the alien landscapes of the moon. We rarely, if ever, experience these underwater wonderlands for ourselves — we are, after all, air-breathing, terrestrial creatures mostly cocooned in cities. It is easy not to notice the perilous state they are in: We have lost 50 percent of coral reefs in the past 20 years and more than 90 percent are expected to die by 2050, a presentation at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in San Diego, California, earlier this year showed. As the oceans heat further and