Scandals surrounding government officials have renewed debate over whether a politician’s private misconduct should be factored in when voters determine their competence and suitability for public office.
Earlier this month, then-National Development Council deputy minister Chiou Jiunn-rong (邱俊榮) was caught taking photographs of young women’s legs at an MRT station in Taipei. The incident prompted Chiou, who was appointed by Premier William Lai (賴清德) to the post in September last year, to tender his resignation, which was swiftly approved by the Executive Yuan.
About a week later, it was discovered that newly sworn-in Executive Yuan spokeswoman Kolas Yotaka, who was elected a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmaker in January 2016, was sentenced to two months in prison for driving under the influence in August 2014.
Kolas’ misconduct quickly triggered an outpouring of criticism and ridicule from the pan-blue camp, with some calling her a hypocrite for breaking the law, but also endorsing a draft amendment proposed by DPP lawmakers in November 2016 to increase penalties for drunk driving.
Due to her apologetic attitude after her record came to light, Kolas steered herself out of the scandal and was inaugurated as the new Cabinet spokeswoman on Monday as scheduled.
In most places around the world, people in public office are put under a microscope and held to higher moral standards. Such close scrutiny is part of the public’s effort to ensure that the people to whom they entrust their future and hard-earned tax dollars possess all the hallmarks of a leader: integrity, honesty and sound judgement.
However, in the middle of it all, sometimes people forget that politicians are also human, who are bound to have flaws and make mistakes. The real question is: What kinds of “mistakes” should be deemed morally permissible for them and where should the line be drawn.
Finding the right answer is extremely difficult, because for some, having an extramarital affair is scandalous enough to warrant a resignation, while others might think that what it takes is domestic violence, corruption or other behavior that is more widely frowned upon.
The dilemma can be best exemplified by Chiou’s and Kolas’ cases. The incidents resulted from poor judgement and poor self-control, but public sentiment toward them was quite different and they also led to different outcomes.
In Chiou’s case, people most probably despised his actions, although what he did was not against the law and did not put anyone in harm’s way, per se.
According to Article 315-1 of the Criminal Code, a person can be charged with offenses against privacy if they peep at or record another person’s private bodily parts. On the other hand, driving under the influence is not only against the law, but was also the cause of more than 6,200 traffic deaths and injuries last year.
However, the public was relatively more forgiving toward Kolas than it was toward Chiou.
It seems that there are yet to be any fixed criteria for what is tolerable behavior among public servants. As foolish as it might sound, perhaps what it all comes down to in the end is just luck and how forgiving people feel that day.
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry