Print

Mail

wiki links

Both camps to blame for recall standoff, experts say

Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman Ma Ying-jeou calls for President Chen Shui-bian's recall in an speech during a protest in Changhua yesterday. PHOTO: CHAN CHAO-YANG, TAIPEI TIMES

The opposition-initiated motion to recall President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has intensified to the point of confrontation between pan-blue and pan-green supporters, and analysts said leaders of both camps should be held responsible.

"The recall campaign has drifted away from its original aim and become an ideological confrontation between pan-blue and pan-green supporters," said Wang Yeh-li (王業立), a political science professor at Tunghai University. "Leaders of the two camps should be held culpable for causing political and social unrest."

Wang criticized Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), saying he'd made inappropriate remarks against Chen.

Ma said earlier this month that Chen would "die a horrible death" if he didn't step down immediately, and urged the president to voluntarily resign instead of waiting to be recalled.

Ma later admitted that his remarks were improper, but argued that he had simply been angry about Chen's lack of sincerity in responding to the scandals involving his family members.

Ma's comments irked pan-green supporters, who allegedly called in to pirate radio stations down south encouraging others to end Ma's life.

Wang also questioned whether Chen was inciting ethnic friction to take some of the heat off himself.

Wang said that Ma, instead of effectively and responsibly responding to the recent spate of corruption scandals plaguing the administration, had succumbed to pressure from his supporters and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) and changed his mind, deciding to endorse the recall motion.

The pan-blue camp claimed that what mattered was the process rather than the end result, realizing that the recall bid was doomed to fail because of the high legal threshold.

The pan-green alliance, on the other hand, criticized the pan-blue camp for pursuing a political agenda and decided to play it cool by boycotting the opposition's plan.

The last two legislative hearings organized by pan-blue lawmakers turned out to be a rehash of TV political talk shows with the absence of guests.

Apart from the political wrestling in the legislature, both camps have mobilized their supporters to stage large-scale protests around the nation.

Commenting on the political strife, Wang said that the public has gradually lost interest in the pan-blue camp's plan, which was originally designed to exhibit the corrupt side of the administration.

"The pan-green camp's counter strategy to play it cool proved efficient, although there is still room for discussion in terms of the president's decision to skip the issuance of a rebuttal to the recall motion," he said. "To respond to the recall motion is not only his legal right but also his constitutional duty."

No matter what justifications the pan-blue alliance made to vindicate their recall motion, Wang said that Chen was duty bound to offer a statement and let the legislature and public judge it.

Ivor Yang (楊奕華), a professor of law at Soochow University, however, expressed a different opinion.

The law does not specify whether the person being recalled must respond. In other words, the president can choose whether to respond to the recall proposal.
This story has been viewed 1967 times.