On Tuesday, Minister of the Interior Yeh Jiunn-rong (葉俊榮) said that his ministry and the Miaoli County Government have agreed to rebuild Chang Pharmacy, which was torn down during an incident in Dapu Borough (大埔) in the county’s Jhunan Township (竹南) in 2013.
On July 18 that year, then-county commissioner Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻) ordered that the pharmacy and three other buildings be torn down as residents were protesting in Taipei.
Two months later, the pharmacy’s owner, Chang Sen-wen (張森文), was found dead in an irrigation ditch near his former home.
On Jan. 3, 2014, the Taichung High Administrative Court ruled that the Ministry of the Interior and the county government had violated the law by demolishing the buildings, and ignored the request that the land be returned to the residents and the buildings restored.
The demand that the land be returned to their owners was later overturned in a first and then a second retrial.
When President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) took office on May 20 last year, there was renewed hope that the demands would finally be met.
Similar incidents keep occurring in Taiwan. It is questionable if things would have gone this far if it had not been for the rise in public awareness, in addition to the perseverance of academia and social movements putting up such a fight.
The people who came forward when they saw the injustices heaved a sigh of relief after the victory, but Chang’s wife and other relatives have paid a heavy price over the past nine years.
In the end, they have at most been given back the property that was theirs all along; it is difficult to call that a victory.
What can be learned from the Chang pharmacy incident?
First, is the government innocent of institutional violence? The court’s decision that the demolition of the buildings was illegal means that Liu was not enforcing the law when he ordered the demolition, but rather broke the law, manifesting “state violence.”
What will his punishment be? Is that not something the courts should address? Will Liu have to take any administrative responsibility as the ministry and the county government spends taxpayers’ money to rebuild the pharmacy? It is clear who made the decision to violate the law and tear down the houses, so are people being told that state violence is fine and anyone involved will get off scot-free?
Second, why does fairness and justice always come late? Demolishing the pharmacy only took a couple of hours, but going to court to have the land returned was a long and grueling process that included demoralizing defeats, and in the end it took five years to get the land back and the property restored.
Why does it have to take so long? Luckily, the pharmacy was not a historical building so restoring it will not be a problem, but who will compensate the Chang family for all their suffering? Who should be held responsible for the death of Chang Sen-wen?
Third, when will land expropriation end? Half of the 154 hectares in Dapu expropriated for the construction of the Jhunan Science Park has been used to build residential buildings, but how many high-tech companies have moved there?
Perhaps this is a case of using infrastructure construction as an excuse to expropriate land for real-estate speculation; is there any difference between this and the MeHAS City (美河市) corruption case, where land expropriated for the construction of a mass rapid transit line was used to build residential buildings?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors and a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Perry Svensson
South China Sea exercises in July by two United States Navy nuclear-powered aircraft carriers reminds that Taiwan’s history since mid-1950, and as a free nation, is intertwined with that of the aircraft carrier. Eventually Taiwan will host aircraft carriers, either those built under its democratic government or those imposed on its territory by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). By September 1944, a lack of sufficient carrier airpower and land-based airpower persuaded US Army and Navy leaders to forgo an invasion to wrest Taiwan from Japanese control, thereby sparing Taiwanese considerable wartime destruction. But two
This year, India and Taiwan can look back on 25 years of so-called unofficial ties. This provides an occasion to ponder over how they can deepen collaboration and strengthen their relations. This reflection must be free from excitement and agitation caused by the ongoing China-US great power jostling as well as China’s aggressive actions against many of its neighbors, including India. It must be based on long-term trends in bilateral engagement. To begin with, India and Taiwan, thus far, have had relations constituted by various activities, but what needs to be thought about now is whether they can transform their ties
The US Navy’s aircraft carrier battle groups are the most dramatic symbol of Washington’s military and geopolitical power. They were critical to winning World War II in the Pacific and have since been deployed in the Indo-Pacific region to communicate resolve against potential adversaries of the US. The presence or absence of the US Seventh Fleet — the configuration of US Navy ships and aircraft in the Indo-Pacific region built around the carriers — generally determines whether war or peace prevails in the region. In the immediate post-war period, Washington’s strategic planners in the administration of then-US president Harry Truman shockingly
On Thursday last week, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a barnstorming speech at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, California, titled “Communist China and the Free World’s Future.” The speech set out in no uncertain terms the insoluble ideological divide between a totalitarian, communist China and the democratic, free-market values of the US. It was also a full-throated call to arms for all nations of the free world to rally behind the US and defeat China. Pompeo elaborated on a clear distinction between China and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), in an attempt to recalibrate the