The new legislative session has commenced, and in less than four days, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus managed to put on an absurd performance, which only goes to show that it has learned nothing from its second consecutive rout in major national elections.
With eyes wide open, voters are looking at how the KMT is handling the draft acts on the presidential transition and ill-gotten party assets. Both these bills will be very important gauges of whether the KMT will be able to engage in true reflection on its past mistakes and rise from the ashes.
Although the presidential transition draft act has passed the first reading, it must not be further delayed and should be passed as soon as possible, so that the transfer of power can go ahead smoothly.
No law has ever been enacted to regulate how this should be done, so the previous two transfers of power were carried out rather precariously, and the public remains oblivious as to whether our national interests were harmed.
There is no need to go into detail about the abstract ins and outs of constitutional theory: The transfer of presidential power must be enshrined in law to guarantee that the transfer can be carried out in the most comprehensive way possible and so that the public’s interests are not jeopardized.
Opposition to this legislation is totally nonsensical. If there are any controversies, they should be promptly addressed by the legislature’s Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee. Even the four issues that the KMT caucus questioned follow a clear logic, so we can only exhort the caucus to stop trying to make a case for opposition when it has no good reason to do so.
The logic behind the draft act is very simple, and KMT politicians should not assume that the public are incapable of understanding it.
For example, what is controversial about setting up offices for the president-elect and the vice president-elect? The ministries should submit reports to both the president-elect and the vice president-elect and provide them with relevant documents so that they can get a good grip on the nation’s current situation as soon as possible and hit the ground running.
The reason outgoing presidents should be prohibited from designating new government personnel or transferring them to other positions is that outgoing presidents should be prevented from appointing their cohorts to lucrative positions in state-owned enterprises or to important posts in the government in the last two or three months before their tenure ends, as these important positions can affect how the new administration will be able to carry out its policies. How controversial can this be?
Since new public opinion has been formed, important matters such as national defense, foreign affairs and cross-strait relations should be addressed based on the will of this newly expressed public opinion. Is this controversial?
The public has lost its trust in President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), and if Ma persists in his refusal to step down until his presidency expires on May 20, frankly speaking, that is worrisome and even frightening to the public, and this is an issue that does not only affect the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the incoming ruling party.
The public is also closely watching the KMT’s handling of the draft act on ill-gotten party assets. The KMT should not underestimate the importance of this bill and the transition bill in the eyes of the public. If the KMT fails to handle them with care, it is very likely that the party will be swept into the dustbin of history.
Unfortunately, the party assets draft bill was blocked by the KMT caucus and did not pass the first legislative reading.
KMT caucus whip Lai Shyh-bao (賴士葆) said the term “ill-gotten” seemed to indicate a political struggle.
If it were the DPP that wanted to stage a political battle with the KMT, the KMT would have nothing to worry about. However, the truth of the matter is that it is the public that wants a political struggle against the KMT over the party asset issue.
If the KMT wants to wage a war against the public, it must not forget the power of the vote. If it persists in fighting this war, it will lose more than another election: It might cease to exist.
Allen Houng is a professor at National Yang-Ming University’s Institute of Philosophy of Mind and Cognition.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under