As election day draws ever closer, nearly 100,000 prosecutors, police officers, investigators and military police are working night and day to investigate vote-buying. Determined to root out vote-buying and campaign violence this year, the government is actively promoting its anti-vote-buying message.
Two thousand vote-buying cases brought to the attention of investigators have been handled in recent days. Those accused include legislators, township heads and vote captains (
Investigating vote-buying is inherently difficult. The vote captains, who do the buying, are extremely inconspicuous, appearing and disappearing like shadows. Only if tips are accurate and followed up by immediate investigation can culprits be caught in possession of incriminating evidence.
If law enforcement officials fails to arrive in time, the criminal activity is completed in a matter of minutes, and the evidence disappears, making the crime difficult to prosecute. If you wish to report vote-buying, please know that every second counts -- just as though you were fighting a fire.
Vote-buying is a criminal act, and someone caught in flagrante delicto can be arrested by anyone. In order to make every second count, it is best to seize the culprit at the scene of the crime and hand him over to the authorities, or at least prevent his escape and immediately call the police. While such actions might involve difficulties, there is a reward of over NT$500,000, so you can do something for yourself while also benefitting the country. It's well worth it.
Investigations into vote-buying must gather tangible evidence before suspects can be prosecuted, so evidence-gathering must be timely. Search and seizure, arrest and summons -- each link in the chain must be executed with lightning speed. Taking action a day, or even a few hours too late -- when evidence can easily be destroyed and the suspect has left the scene -- is all too common. Prosecutors, police and investigators should recognize the crucial importance of acting promptly.
The purpose of vote-buying is to get elected. If prosecutors can't make prompt indictments when investigating vote-buying, their performance will be marred. In the past, many prosecutors avoided handing down indictments before the election -- even if they had clear evidence -- for fear of criticism from candidates and the public and to avoid influencing election results.
As a result, candidates didn't care if their vote-buying was discovered. Prosecutors should completely discard such misgivings. An election should be a fair competition in which the best person wins. If one candidate has already purchased votes to create an unfair competitive environment, why shouldn't prosecutors hand down indictments before the election so that voters know the facts and can make an informed choice?
Rational voters know that an indictment does not amount to a conviction. They will pay attention to the demands of social justice and the content of reports before conscientiously casting their ballots. If a candidate has clearly carried out or benefitted from vote-buying, what right does he have to run for office and be elected?
In today's society, in which the boundaries between right and wrong have become blurred, whether an indictment would influence voters remains to be seen. But rational people will certainly demand that charges be brought whenever possible prior to elections because, at the very least, nobody wants to see a situation in which vote buyers get elected and honest candidates suffer defeat.
Although an indictment can be brought against a candidate who gets elected, that candidate retains his privileges as the incumbent prior to a guilty verdict and a ruling annulling the election victory. The Election and Recall Law (
Vote-buying has been around as long as there have been elections, but eradicating it is not an impossible task. People must wake up to and stand together against vote-buying, promptly reporting all occurances. Police, investigators and judges must act in a timely manner, gathering evidence and conducting investigations quickly and with attention to detail, handing down indictments and making judgements. If this happens, the eradication of vote-buying and improvement of the quality of our democracy will be more than just a dream.
Chu Nan is chief prosecutor in the Kaohsiung district prosecutor's office.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS