The Red Cross Society of the Republic of China, established more than a century ago, has in recent years been involved in many controversies, which has induced public antipathy toward the organization.
Legislators of the New Power Party (NPP) and other political parties are now working together to promote the abolishment of the Red Cross Society Act of the Republic of China (中華民國紅十字會法), which would require the organization to adhere to regulations stipulated in the Civil Associations Act (人民團體法) and the Charity Donations Act (公益勸募條例), just like every other civil association in the nation.
The NPP is urging the abolishment of the Red Cross Act not only because doing so is in line with public expectations, but also because the NPP wants to remove the organization’s privileges in order to facilitate the normalization of the organization and its development.
At a recent news conference, Red Cross representatives and officials from the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Health and Welfare and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were invited to take part in a joint discussion on the necessity of abolishing the Red Cross Act. A health ministry official said that the Red Cross Society abides by the Charity Donations Act when it raises funds.
However, a Red Cross representative said that when the organization was raising money for Syrian refugees last year, it wanted to follow the Charity Donations Act, but the health ministry rejected their request and demanded that the organization follow the Red Cross Act.
The incongruity between what the Red Cross and the health ministry said makes it clear that the existence of the Red Cross Act makes government officials unwilling to supervise or review the act’s implementation.
Moreover, the organization has long been under the control of cohorts of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which is why government officials do not usually discuss the Red Cross’ management.
After things heated up recently, lawyer and former Red Cross secretary-general C.V. Chen (陳長文) criticized the legislature for “gauging the heart of a gentleman with their own narrow measure.”
Since Chen’s relationship with President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is well known to the public, Chen’s attempt to defend the Red Cross only serves to confirm the criticism.
As the old Chinese saying goes: A guilty person gives himself away by consciously protesting his innocence.
The NPP has emphasized that the many scandals involving the Red Cross have not been isolated incidents and are the result of the organization’s systemic flaws, which make it possible for people to exploit loopholes.
Since its inception in 1954, only minor adjustments have been made to the Red Cross Act. The act is the only special law for a civil organization in the nation and it precludes the Red Cross from being subjected to the same regulations that other civil organizations have to follow when they raise funds.
The removal of the Red Cross’ privileges, addressing its outdated management system and making its finances transparent and subject to public oversight are extremely important measures.
The Red Cross Act was introduced because the historical context at the time called for it, but it is exactly this context that Taiwan needs to address through a process of transitional justice.
Hsu Yung-ming is an associate professor of political science at Soochow University.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
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