The decision by the Council of Grand Justices ruling the National Communications Commission (NCC) unconstitutional has sparked another spat between the government and opposition.
Despite announcing that Article 4 of the Organic Law of the NCC (
Politics prevailed from the founding of the NCC. Even after the council ruled the NCC unconstitutional, political calculation still dominates the thinking of commission members. Their refusal to step down will sabotage the organization's credibility and independence. and will turn the NCC into another battlefield for rival political camps.
The council's ruling has both constitutional and political implications. According to Article 4 of the Organic Law of the NCC, political parties will "recommend" 15 nominees out of the 18 on the commission. These 15 had to be apportioned based on the proportion of the parties' legislative seats, meaning the major party in the legislature would have most seats on the commission. The premier selected the final three nominees. All 18 nominees were required to gain the approval of a nomination committee.
Article 16 regulated that any punishment meted out to media organizations prior to the commission's establishment could be reconsidered upon appeal. Constitutionally speaking, the legal basis of the NCC interfered with the Cabinet's exercise of power. Grand justices believed that Article 4 infringed the Cabinet's authority as the nation's top administrative government office, which is protected by the Constitution. Since the Constitution vests the power to appoint government officials in the hands of the executive branch, the composition of the NCC based largely on partisan interests, violated the principle of political independence of such a media watchdog mechanism.
The fact that pan-blues have taken advantage of their majority in the legislature and its review authority to approve their favorite candidates has run against the premier's constitutional powers.
As with so many laws passed by the pan-blue controlled legislature in recent years, the NCC's organic law is tailored to suit the interests of the pan-blue parties and to enlarge the legislature's powers. Such partisan-driven political maneuvering is not only detrimental to democratic evolution but also to press freedom.
The nation's rapid democratic change since 2000 has not necessarily brought about healthy political development or a fair, yet competitive media culture. Instead, what we have witnessed is a lack of professionalism and overemphasis on trivial stories from our media. In most cases it has become a tool for politicians.
Opinion polls increasingly show that people have become suspicious of the media and increasingly adept at spotting its attempts at manipulation. People now see the media as a kind of special-interest group, no more objective or independent than any other group in its views.
To untie the political knots of the pan-green/pan-blue struggle, any attempt to forge an independent media watchdog organization must exclude political influence.
To play a constructive role as the "fourth branch of the government," we need a non-partisan, truly independent NCC. There should be no political interference in the nomination and review procedure of selecting its members. Only through institutionalization of the NCC and exclusion of political influence can we enjoy a free and healthy media.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS