Many have been hopeful that Taiwan’s democratization, touted as a success story, would lead the nation toward the maturation of its democracy every step of the way, with every election freer and fairer than the previous ones as the state protects democratic values by upholding the principle of administrative neutrality.
However, recent incidents suggest otherwise, with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration again managing to amaze with its brazenness. In the ongoing controversy over the National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) MG149 bank account involving independent Taipei mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), it appears the entire party-state apparatus has been mobilized to attack Ko on all fronts.
Foremost, from the judicial front: The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office is investigating charges filed last month by KMT Legislator Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾), who accused Ko of laundering money with the account, which he had set up for the surgical intensive care unit team he led at NTUH.
Then, from the executive branch front: The National Audit Office of the Control Yuan is also investigating the account after KMT Legislator Alex Fai (費鴻泰) demanded that it “examine the MG149 account closely” or else “[the office’s] budget request will not be passed.”
There was, without doubt, an undertone to Fai’s remarks — which essentially amounted to a threat — that his idea of “examining the account closely” implied an imperative to find irregularities in the account.
Then there was confirmation from the Ministry of Finance’s National Taxation Bureau of Taipei on Tuesday that, after what it claimed was an informant’s tipoff, it is investigating Ko for alleged tax evasion, and has ordered several institutions where Ko was invited to give speeches in the past three years to explain payments they made to Ko.
Then, from the legislative branch front: The public was treated to an unbelievable scene at the legislature on Monday in which volleys of questions were fired by KMT lawmakers grilling NTUH president Huang Kuan-tang (黃冠棠) over the bank account. Imagine a joint meeting called by the legislature’s Finance Committee and the Education and Culture Committee with the sole topic throughout the session being one account associated with one particular mayoral candidate — if this does not constitute lawmakers abusing their legislative power by interfering with a judicial case, then what does?
The extent to which the KMT administration seems to be exploiting the state apparatus for electoral purposes is beyond comprehension, and appalling.
However, the crux of the matter is that there has been no evidence suggesting a single cent from the account has gone into Ko’s pockets; the NTUH and the National Audit Office have both maintained since Lo lodged the allegation that there were no irregularities in the operation of the MG149 account.
In light of the developments so far, it appears that the object of the KMT lawmakers, and the KMT government for that matter, is not to resolve questions over the account after all, but to trash Ko’s reputation.
The MG149 probe is reminiscent of the Yu Chang allegations of 2012 involving then-Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), who, after being accused of manipulating investments by the National Development Fund in TaiMed Biologics Inc during her stint as vice premier in 2007, was ultimately cleared by the judiciary of any wrongdoing.
As Ko correctly put it the other day, “the KMT was never punished over Yu Chang, it only benefited from the incident, which led to the MG149 case today.”
The electorate really has to take note, or this sort of behavior from the KMT will just happen again and again — which would not bode well for democracy.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS