As the end of his term approaches, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) seems to be busy ensuring his own survival once he steps down as president next year.
Judging by what transpired in last year’s Sunflower movement and nine-in-one elections, the public’s belief is that his major policies and official appointments have lost legitimacy, and that his administration should take on the role of a caretaker government, leaving more room for reform by the next administration — in line with the spirit of democracy.
Instead, Ma has vowed to strike back. Ignoring the fact that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-dominated legislature can no longer represent the change in public opinion, Ma wants to continue to use this unrepresentative body to push through major policies and official appointments as he sees fit. It would not be an overstatement to call such an egocentric person an enemy of the state.
Despite public opposition, Ma has since the end of last year insisted on nominating candidates for the Control Yuan and the Council of Grand Justices. If his nominees met public expectations, this would not be a problem.
However, he seems to choose candidates who are reflections of himself — individuals who share his ideology and political stance. Control Yuan President Chang Po-ya (張博雅), formerly the head of the Central Election Commission, was a willing collaborator during Ma’s conflict with Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平).
It is therefore not very difficult to imagine what kind of a watchdog the Control Yuan will be under her presidency.
Newly appointed Control Yuan Vice President Sun Ta-chuan (孫大川) even cited European royal traditions in an attempt to justify the existence of the Control Yuan. Is such a major government organ not more deserving of being removed by the Appendectomy Project, whose mission it is to recall inept politicians from office?
Likewise, one of the candidates recommended by the Ministry of Justice for a seat on the Council of Grand Justices is Lin Hui-huang (林輝煌), a military prosecutor in the trials stemming from the Kaohsiung Incident of 1979.
Two victims of the Incident — Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) and former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) — have opposed Lin’s candidacy.
They said that if a KMT persecutor of members of the Taiwanese democracy movement can be nominated as a candidate for grand justice, Taiwan’s transitional justice would be rendered meaningless.
The reasoning is very simple: If a prosecutor in Nazi Germany had been nominated as a candidate for grand justice in Germany after the war, would that not imply that the Nazi Party was innocent? Why would Lin be recommended and even nominated if it were not for the purpose of continuing the denunciation of each stage of Taiwan’s democracy movement and covering up the numerous crimes committed by the KMT?
What is even more absurd is that Minister of Justice Luo Ying-shay (羅瑩雪), who recommended Lin, said: “The Kaohsiung Incident happened a long time ago.” Is she implying that it would be OK to be a hatchet man as long as it happened a long time ago? The Kaohsiung Incident took place at the end of 1979, a mere three decades ago. Is that a long time ago?
This kind of attitude and thinking are the reason Ma has never offered a sincere apology over the 228 Incident or assigned blame to those responsible for it. Instead, he continues to worship Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), year after year. Does this mean that the 228 Incident is inconsequential because it occurred in 1947, about 68 years ago and obviously earlier than the Kaohsiung Incident?
Following this kind of absurd reasoning, why do Ma and those of his ilk still harbor a grudge against the Japanese over the Marco Polo Bridge Incident? After all, that happened in 1937.
Anyone can see whether Luo’s performance as minister of justice is without suspicion.
Nonetheless, she is considered a good official by Ma, and his administration could not care less about the fairness of the justice system and transitional justice. All they think about is how to make full use of their power before it expires, to build an enduring structure to defend their ideology, pave the way for their safe exit and keep the hands of future administrations tied by maintaing control of the political structure.
Consider this: With a Kaohsiung Incident prosecutor as a grand justice, whenever matters of transitional justice come up and however vigorous civic movements become, all efforts will be futile when they reach the Council of Grand Justices. As a consequence, it would not be very surprising if the KMT’s ill-gotten wealth were legalized or deemed constitutional.
During World War II, Jews were killed in a genocide implemented by the Nazis. Former Nazi leader Adolf Hitler had many accomplices — Nazi Party members — who followed his orders. Jewish political philosopher Hannah Arendt said that these people personified “the banality of evil.” Such evil also existed in autocratic Taiwan and such people continue to exist in democratic Taiwan, as the means with which Ma and those of his ilk pursue the “one China” dictatorship.
A wave of civic awareness has spread across Taiwan. A growing number of civil servants are waking up and have stopped acting as the KMT’s accomplices. However, people like Ma, Luo and Chang who aspire to “advanced evil” take delight in evil.
Will Lin decline the nomination out of shame and as a way to redeem himself for his “banal evil,” or will he happily accept the nomination because he is proud of his past and ready to become a proponent of “advanced evil”?
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry