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
“Testy,” “divisive,” “frigid,” “an exchange of insults” were some of the media descriptions of last month’s meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and their Chinese counterparts. Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass said that, rather than the “deft handling” needed in US-China relations, this encounter was “mishandled, a terrible start [with] way too much public signaling.” Yet, contrary to conventional wisdom, the acrimonious encounter with Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) and Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) was a great success for US diplomacy
In studies of Taiwan’s demographic changes, the Institute of Sociology at Academia Sinica has found that a mere 36.5 percent of men and 19.6 percent of women think getting married is an important life event. The institute also found that the government spending money or amending laws and regulations in order to encourage families to have children is having no impact on the birthrate. Opinions differ on whether this kind of change is a matter of national security, as Japan faces a similar situation, without having a negative impact on its economic strength. Fewer women are willing to marry and the divorce
Interrupting the assimilation of Xinjiang’s Uighur population would result in an unmanageable national security threat to China. Numerous governments and civil society organizations around the world have accused China of massive human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and labeled Beijing’s inhumane and aggressive social re-engineering efforts in the region as “cultural genocide.” Extensive evidence shows that China’s forceful ethnic assimilation policies in Xinjiang are aimed at replacing Uighur ethnic and religious identity with a so-called scientific communist dogma and Han Chinese culture. The total assimilation of Uighurs into the larger “Chinese family” is also Beijing’s official, central purpose of its ethnic policies
Early last month, China’s rubber-stamp legislature, the National People’s Congress (NPC), officially approved the country’s 14th Five-Year Plan. The strategy was supposed to demonstrate that China has a long-term economic vision that would enable it to thrive, despite its geopolitical contest with the US. However, before the ink on the NPC’s stamp could dry, China had already begun sabotaging the plan’s chances of success. The new plan’s centerpiece is the “dual-circulation” strategy, according to which China would aim to foster growth based on domestic demand and technological self-sufficiency. This would not only reduce China’s reliance on external demand; it would also
RSS