Print

Mail

wiki links

ANALYSIS: Activists renew call to scrap law on staging rallies

“You [the KMT] have always been the majority party in the legislature. You didn’t amend the law in the past. Now that you are in power, will you amend the law now?” — a student

Students taking part in a sit-in in Taipei to protest against the police crackdown on rallies against the visit by China's top cross-strait negotiator urged the government to scrap the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法).

Dubbed as an “evil law” by activists, the Assembly and Parade Law has long been regarded as an instrument used by the government to control the people and curb their right to freedom of expression.

As the law favors the rulers over the public, it is not surprising why the government has never prioritized its review — regardless of which party is in power, said Lin Por-yee (林柏儀), a member of an alliance calling for the law to be amended.

One year after 38 years of martial law ended in 1987 under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime, the law was enacted by the rubber-stamp legislature, a vast majority of whom were elected in 1947 in China and held the posts until a full election of the legislature in 1992.

Since then, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has described the law, along with the National Security Law (國家安全法) and the Civil Organization Law (人民團體法), as the “trinity” — relics of the martial law era to serve the interests of the rulers.

While the DPP had described the Parade and Assembly Law as a “notorious law,” the party didn't make an effort to reform it during its eight years in power, Lin said.

To the surprise of many activists, it was the DPP government that initiated an amendment to the law in 2002 — expanding the areas off limits to protesters — which was approved by the legislature with the support of KMT and People First Party lawmakers.

Other changes to the law included the removal in 2002 of an article prohibiting people from proclaiming support for communism or territorial division when assembling or parading in public following an interpretation by the Council of Grand Justices that it was unconstitutional and an exception to a regulation that required march organizers to obtain permission six working days prior to a demonstration.

“Despite these revisions, they didn't make it a better one [law] that can protect the rights enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution — people shall have freedom of assembly and association,“ Lin said.

Chiu Yen-liang (邱延亮), an associate research fellow at the Academia Sinica's Institute of Ethnology, found “astounding similarities” when comparing the law and China's “Law on Assemblies, Processions and Demonstrations,” which was enacted a few months after the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre.

The problem is that the intent of the law has been distorted — from a law supposed to ensure a smooth proceeding of demonstrations to one for rulers to govern protesters, Chiu said.

Criticism against the law centers on the regulation requiring protesters obtain a permit first from the police precinct where the assembly is to take place.

Activists have demanded that the provision be replaced by a simple registration procedure.

That regulation is unfavorable to protesters as it means they have to “bow their heads” first to the police — as the representative of the state — to get permission to stage a protest, said Bruce Liao (廖元豪), an assistant professor of law at National Chengchi University.

Activists also oppose the law because it gives police “very broad discretion” as to how and when to dissolve a demonstration and drive away protesters, while freeing police from corresponding accountability.

The regulations also require the public to obey the police during rallies, making it more like a law designed to suppress rather than protect the people, Liao said.

Activists have also criticized the law for imposing a criminal punishment of up to two years in jail on the rally organizer and participants.

This, Lin said, was meant to discourage the public from taking to the streets.

Several KMT and PFP lawmakers had listened and accepted some of the views and suggestions by activists on amending the law, but their commitment has been called into question as the move didn't come after some red-clad protesters were investigated for violating the law during their protests calling for former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to step down.

Legislative records show that the lawmakers, who control a majority of the seats, did not push hard for the legislature to pass the measures.

That is why students joining the sit-in since Thursday, continue to doubt the government's willingness to reform the law even after Cabinet Secretary-General Hsueh Hsiang-chuan (薛香川) told them on Friday afternoon that the KMT administration already has an amendment to the law in place in the legislature.

“You [the KMT] have always been the majority party in the legislature. You didn't amend the law in the past. Now that you are in power, will you amend the law?” a student said in response to Hsueh.
This story has been viewed 1162 times.