Since Wednesday last week, a group of volunteers has been taking turns staging a hunger strike in a park facing the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) headquarters in Taipei to urge the DPP government to pass draft amendments to the Referendum Act (公民投票法).
Led by the People Rule Foundation, the participants, many coming to Taipei from across the nation despite the rain and low temperatures, are taking part in the “nonviolent protest” in the hope of contributing their efforts toward the consolidation of the nation’s democratic achievements.
Their resilience should put the DPP government to shame, as it appears to be dragging its feet in steering the nation toward direct democracy.
Proposed amendments to the act that would lower the minimum age for referendum voters from 20 to 18 passed their first reading at the Legislative Yuan’s Internal Administration Committee on Dec. 15 last year, with committee members reaching a consensus on lowering voting thresholds and the majority required for passing referendums.
While the committee at the time said lawmakers would deliberate further on the issue, not even a single meeting has been convened since then.
The lack of progress not only shows negligence on the part of the lawmakers, but also suggests how little importance the DPP attaches to the issue, despite talk and pledges from party officials about upholding democratic values and deepening the nation’s democracy.
The act has been dubbed the “birdcage act” due to its extremely high threshold for a referendum to succeed, requiring the participation of at least 50 percent of the electorate and at least 50 percent of referendum voters agreeing to a proposal.
The thresholds are set so high that they practically deprive people of their right to spur governmental change through referendums, let alone the right to direct democracy.
Calls for amending the act have been popular among DPP politicians.
In May, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), in her capacity as DPP chairperson, reaffirmed during a DPP Central Standing Committee meeting that the legislature would complete due legislative process to amend the act by the end of this year.
In her victory speech on the night of Jan. 16 last year, when the nation’s voters handed her the presidency and her party an absolute majority in the legislature, Tsai said: “We may celebrate tonight; we may joyfully celebrate tonight, but when the sun comes up tomorrow, we are to shoulder the responsibilities for reforming the nation.”
“As the DPP has the majority, we will put the maximum effort into reform,” she added.
Tsai’s words sounded sincere then, but words that are not followed by concrete action are just words.
December is around the corner, but the proposed amendments to the act are sitting idly at the legislature.
After winning the presidency, Tsai called on DPP members and people in her administration to be “humble, humble and humble” while in power.
Hopefully, Tsai will revisit her own words and remember her solemn pledges to the public in terms of pushing for reform and consolidating the nation’s democracy.
If Tsai and her fellow DPP politicians remember their campaign promises only when election time comes around, then the Tsai administration would be no different from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which is known for only making empty promises.
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS