Despite President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) repeated vows to protect the freedom of the press, the government under his leadership never ceases to surprise with how little it actually cares about the subject — with the latest example being the arrests of three journalists and the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) lawsuit against them.
Protesters and journalists alike were shocked late on Thursday night when they heard the news that three journalists — one from the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) one from the online news outlet Coolloud and a freelancer — were arrested as they followed a group of students who stormed the ministry building and intruded into the minister’s office.
Following their arrest, Zhongzheng First Precinct Police Chief Chang Chi-wen (張奇文) told them that they were trespassing because they had not been invited by the ministry. Later, the police said that they were arrested because the ministry was pressing charges against them — protesters and journalists alike — for trespassing. Meanwhile, Minister of Education Wu Se-hwa (吳思華) said it was the police that recommended legal action against the journalists, but that the ministry would not withdraw the lawsuit unless it could be proven that the journalists did not play a leading role in the intrusion.
It is difficult to determine exactly why the three journalists were arrested, since the police and the ministry are giving contradictory information, but whatever the real reason is, arresting journalists doing their job is unacceptable in a democracy like Taiwan — or at least in what the government claims is a democracy.
Unfortunately, it was not the first time something like this has happened.
Since Ma took office in 2008, there have been numerous incidents in which the government or the police tried to restrict journalists’ right to work, especially during demonstrations.
There have been incidents when the police tried to block access to journalists, without being able to explain why or the legal basis for such moves; there have been incidents in which the police threatened charges of obstruction of law enforcement if journalists did not stay out of certain areas, even though those areas were never officially declared restricted areas; the Taipei City Police Department even wanted to designate a “press zone” at scenes of mass demonstration, and ask journalists to stay only in the zone.
Occasionally, such as during the night when thousands of demonstrators briefly occupied the Executive Yuan compound in March last year, the police have beaten journalists or removed them by force even after they showed their press cards.
Beyond all the “small tricks” that the police employ to block the media, the arrests of journalists on Thursday night was the most serious violation of the freedom of the press in recent times, and it will certainly remind people of what governments in authoritarian states, such as China or North Korea, would do.
Freedom of the press is essential in a democracy, because the media play a key role as a watchdog to prevent the government from harming the interests of the public. It is unimaginable what Taiwan would become of if media outlets are silenced due to government threats.
Most people believe that the Martial Law days are long gone, but what has happened in recent years has been worrisome, and that worry is profoundly felt by all those who work in the field of journalism.
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