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.
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
RSS