In 30 days, voters are to go to the polls and exercise their democratic right to vote in the presidential and legislative elections.
While the nation is often lauded for its robust democracy — its democratization is a proud achievement — people often seem to equate being able to vote with being a part of a direct and representative democracy, without considering how their voices have in fact been muzzled as a result of the Referendum Act (公民投票法), which is known as a “bird cage” act.
Earlier this month, Taiwan March concluded a one-year-and-a-half campaign to collect signatures from those who support lowering the thresholds stipulated in the Referendum Act for a petition to proceed. Although the group failed to achieve its goal by not being able to collect enough petitions to progress to the second stage of the petition process, its efforts and dedication in garnering about 220,000 signatures across the nation ought to be recognized and applauded.
It might be fair to say that Taiwan March’s efforts are the latest casualty in a long list of referendum-related efforts killed off by the act’s anachronistic regulations, which stipulate that a successful petition for a referendum requires 0.5 percent of eligible voters who took part in the previous presidential election to sign it — about 80,000 people. In addition, 5 percent of voters, or approximately 800,000 people, need to sign a petition before it can be screened by the Cabinet-level Referendum Review Committee.
Given the high thresholds, as well as the fact that the act saddles the public with the Referendum Review Committee, which filters out people’s voices, Taiwanese have been severely limited in their rights to exercise democracy.
The regulations mean members of the public have no recourse to national referendums to resolve disputes and so have to resort to street demonstrations, as in the case of last year’s protests against the controversial cross-strait service trade agreement that culminated in the Sunflower movement.
Equally outdated are some of the regulations regarding recalls of public servants, which stipulate that 2 percent of an official’s constituency must sign a petition for a recall in the first stage and 13 percent in the second stage, with the final vote requiring at least half of the electorate to cast ballots and at least half of those polled to agree to the recall.
As a result, the public has witnessed efforts launched to recall lawmakers who were deemed inept fail due to petition drives that failed to reach the thresholds to pass one of the stages.
In other words, although Article 17 of the Constitution clearly states that the public has the right to elect and recall officials, and initiate referendums, the experience of those exercising the rights to recall and initiate referendums have shown that the practice is far more difficult than it seems.
Taiwan is a democratic nation, yet the most crucial democratic element — public oversight and participation — has often been shut out due to the bird cage act.
The absurdity of people holding the right to vote, but not the right to recall, surely makes a mockery of the nation’s democracy.
As Jan. 16 approaches, hopefully legislative candidates, regarding voters as their touchia (頭家), or boss, would support amendments to the Referendum Act, Civil Servants Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法) and other laws to enable Taiwanese to be the true masters of the nation and not have to watch as their democratic rights are hijacked.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
RSS