The Council of Grand Justices’ ruling that a land expropriation and development project for a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) depot in New Taipei City’s Sindian District (新店) is unconstitutional should serve as a warning to the government, which has been increasingly favoring such “joint development” projects.
Since 1991, the Taipei City Government has forcibly expropriated 239 plots of land in the district, which was then known as Sindian City, Taipei County, to make way for the maintenance depot. However, 40 of the plots — covering 6.27 hectares — were not used for depot construction; rather, the city government under then-Taipei mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2001 worked with Radium Life Tech Co to build high-rise apartment buildings, prompting previous landowners to file lawsuits against the city government, demanding compensation totaling more than NT$20 billion (US$600.7 million).
The expropriation was declared unconstitutional on Friday, with the council finding it in violation of the landowners’ right to property because the expropriated land was not in fact used for constructing MRT facilities.
Although this is the first case in which a land expropriation project has been declared unconstitutional, it is not the first time the government initiated a public construction “package” that includes projects that would benefit businesses unrelated to the original public construction project.
One such example is the Taoyuan Aerotropolis project, which is meant to upgrade the Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport and develop surrounding areas into a free economic pilot zone, with land reserved for manufacturing and industry.
It is certainly one of the biggest development projects in the nation, with as much as 6,150 hectares of private land in Dayuan (大園), Lujhu (蘆竹) and Jhongli (中壢) districts in Taoyuan set to be expropriated, affecting tens of thousands of residents.
The project may sound reasonable, but a closer look reveals that it includes a “coastal recreational zone,” complete with luxury hotels, resorts and shopping centers. The project is supposed to upgrade the airport and develop the industries in the surrounding area — why should residents sacrifice their properties for coastal resorts and shopping centers?
In another, less-noticed project in Tucheng District (土城), New Taipei City, the government plans to relocate the Taipei Detention Center, the New Taipei City District Courthouse and the New Taipei City Prosecutors’ Office to a farming community that is only about 2km from where the judicial institutions are now.
The relocation plan has raised doubts among locals, who do not think the 2km move would make much of a difference. What is more appalling is that while the facilities would take up about 25 hectares, an area of more than 160 hectares is to be expropriated, where the New Taipei City Government plans to also build high-rise apartments, commercial buildings and shopping malls.
The reason locals demanded the relocation in the first place is that they do not want to live next to a prison, so it does not make much sense to move it only 2km. What is even more odd is the government’s plan to have construction firms build new apartment complexes around a new prison.
If private companies are interested in building facilities not related to a public construction project itself — like in the Aerotropolis project — they should do it the “regular” way: Purchase the land by negotiating with landowners, instead of acquiring it through government expropriation.
It is a good thing that the Council of Grand Justices has caught something fishy in the Sindian construction package. Hopefully the judiciary’s action does not stop here.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with