This month’s elections and the accompanying referendums are almost here. The large amount of publicity, debate and level of engagement surrounding the referendums has not only given the public a rare opportunity to reflect on and discuss important issues, but has further consolidated Taiwan’s democracy.
Referendums Nos. 10, 11 and 12 were proposed by two groups opposed to same-sex marriage and same-sex education. The groups established national referendum offices: the Office Opposed to the Anti-gay Referendums (反對愛家公投辦公室) and the Ren Ching Community Service Association (中華仁親社區關懷協會), which, in practice hold the same positions as the groups proposing the referendums.
Both offices obtained the right to participate in debates on the three referendums, creating the preposterous situation in which the debates are conducted in an echo chamber by two groups that are against same-sex rights.
This situation reveals the undemocratic nature of these groups and has severely damaged the referendum movement, which really should be a milestone for Taiwan’s democracy.
The basis for conducting referendum debates is set out in Article 17 of the Referendum Act (公民投票法), under additional powers granted to the Central Election Commission to carry out “two measures”: Measures for the Implementation of a National Referendum Presentation or Debate (全國性公民投票意見發表會或辯論會實施辦法) and Measures for the Establishment of a National Referendum Office and Staff (全國性公民投票辦事處及辦事人員設置辦法).
Article 17 of the act states that the commission “shall provide representatives of positive and negative opinions with the time to present their opinions or debate through national broadcast TV channels at public expense.”
Under Articles 2 and 7 of the rules on setting up referendum offices, the proposer of a referendum and representatives of groups supporting or opposing the referendum can establish an office simply by providing a few documents such as a registration form and an identification card.
The commission has the authority to review office permits, although the rules provide no further authority apart from verifying that the required documentation was correctly submitted.
Article 2 of the rules on setting up referendum debates states that the number of debates that registered campaign groups can participate in should be determined by drawing lots.
A combination of these two sets of rules created the absurd situation in which the two groups opposed to same-sex marriage were able to make a mockery of the process.
Supporters of the referendums against same-sex marriage were able to set up more than one office, monopolize the debates and deprive those opposed to the referendums of the opportunity to fully express their opinions.
The Referendum Act was meant to bring democracy closer to the public, employing direct democracy to make up for the limitations of representative democracy.
All referendum groups should be able to adequately mobilize supporters and fully express their opinions within the open market of free speech, thereby strengthening the democratic process.
The act stipulates that presentations and debates should held to avoid voters from being herded like sheep to vote for a particular cause and to prevent referendums from descending into populism, with emotion trumping rational thought and the majority suppressing minority groups.
Presentations and debates also ensure that the electorate is provided with sufficient information and diverse views to enable informed and rational decisionmaking.
Referendums should enable Taiwanese society to further deepen its democracy.
The hijacking of the referendum process by those opposed to same-sex marriage has exposed their intolerance and lack of courage to engage in rational debate. They have also deprived the public of the opportunity to hear alternative viewpoints, turned the referendum process into a farce and inflicted deep and lasting damage to the nation’s democratic spirit.
Amid widespread criticism of their actions, the national offices set up by the two groups said they would relinquish their right to participate in the debates, thereby bringing an end to this strange process.
However, only amending the act and the two measures will prevent a similar situation.
Amendments should specify that the commission will review public statements and opinions issued by referendum groups prior to letting them participate in debates to ensure that the process is not sabotaged.
The commission must ensure that it always places itself above the political fray and remains scrupulously neutral to safeguard and strengthen Taiwan’s democracy.
Lin Chun-yuan is an associate professor of law at Chung Yuan Christian University.
Translated by Edward Jones
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
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