Those who have gotten used to the passionate performances in Taiwan's elections would feel rather bored by elections in Europe. For example, there are three everlasting rules for German elections -- no change, no risk-taking, and no demands; thus, the campaign strategies formulated are rather bland.
The mudslinging and name-smearing tactics used in this year's presidential election in Taiwan, however, were unbearable. On a positive side, we identified many personal flaws of the candidates, narrowing the gap between them and the people and giving them a more humanized image. This is certainly preferable to the past deification of political figures. However, people ought to hold respect for the law -- particularly during elections. If politicians knowingly break the law to win elections and get away with it, we will lose any hope for shaping a general respect for the law.
All the negative campaign ads and allegations have invited potential criminal liability. The suits filed between the candidates, if successful, would involve liabilities for public insults (公然侮辱罪) and crime and defamation (誨謗罪), as well as liabilities under Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Law (總統副總統罷選法).
Campaign rhetoric such as Lien's accusation that another candidate was "heartless and cruel (狼心狗肺)" were obviously "public insults." On the other hand, there are also those allegations waged by Lin Jui-tu (林瑞圖) and Chiu Yi (邱毅) about Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) involvement in the lottery scandal, accusations made by Taipei City Council or Lee Ching-yuan (李慶元) about Chen's extra-marital affair and Lien's patronage of massage parlors, as well as many anonymous advertisements.
The targets defended themselves by filing court complaints to try and show they were innocent and so retain public support. But since all these negative ads and allegations can bring legal liability, why did all the candidates play with fire? The reason is simple: The expected return was far higher than the cost incurred.
1. The liabilities incurred are relatively light. Although jail terms of one to five years can be handed down for these crimes, more typically convicted offenders receive only a fine or probation. Besides, the candidates are never the ones to get punished, but the "bouncers" they retain to do their dirty work.
2. These lawsuits go nowhere. They are so numerous that we have lost count, and after the election is over, no one cares -- not the prosecutors, judges, or even the parties involved. Losers simply leave the political arena. Winners gain immunity, and they may voluntarily withdraw the suits they filed, to demonstrate generosity.
3. Negative allegations bring free publicity. Since the news media have acquired quite an appetite for tabloid news, it will run virtually any allegations, as long as someone is bold enough to point fingers. Furthermore, the media's failure to verify certainly helps.
The media always criticizes candidates for lacking substance; however, only tabloid news makes headlines. The media does not even bother to report the candidates' campaign platforms. Therefore, the negative ads and allegations may be characterized as an evolutionary adaptation by the candidates' efforts to comply with media demands. Of course, the media reflect public demand -- although people always criticize elections, they still love to watch campaign news.
If the media were to refuse to cover or run any unverified defamatory attacks or anonymous ads, and if the voters did not vote for candidates who engage in mudslinging, the negative campaign ads and allegations would disappear. Although elections would become dull, they would be truly democratic.
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional
RSS