On the eve of the 2004 presidential election, then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) were injured by two bullets as they took part in a motorcade. The shooting provoked a confrontation between the pan-blue and pan-green camps that lasted for many years. Just before last month’s elections for mayors, councilors and borough wardens in five special municipalities, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politician Sean Lien (連勝文) was injured by a gunshot during a campaign rally.
Whatever the motive for these attacks and whatever effect they may have had on the elections, what is certain is public discussion and speculation about the incidents have greatly harmed Taiwan’s democratic electoral system. Legislative measures are needed to prevent such incidents from happening again.
The nation’s election and recall laws should be amended so that elections would automatically be suspended in the event of a firearms attack. The amendment could be worded as follows: “In the event of an attack using firearms against a candidate, or a candidate’s spouse or close relative, or an election campaign worker, at a public poll campaign site or during a campaign activity, within 48 hours before a legislative election or an election for a councilor or mayor in a special municipality, the Central Election Commission shall announce a delay of one week in the timing of the election.”
The reasons for such an amendment are as follows:
First, it would promote fair elections. The value of democratic elections is that, through periodic popular participation, they enable virtuous people who are genuinely capable of governing and engaging in political deliberations to emerge by winning the favor of rational voters. Elections are not supposed to involve shootings that influence the result by generating sympathy votes, so that diligent and conscientious candidates see all their years of hard work suddenly reduced to nothing, while voters’ desire for a virtuous and capable politician comes to naught. When this occurs, it badly undermines a democratic system.
Second, it would reduce confrontation and its social cost. Whether the shooting is motivated by politics or a personal grudge, politicians will seek to use it to influence elections. There is no way of judging scientifically and precisely how much influence it may actually have. The pan-blue and the pan-green camps are bound to have their own interpretations of the event and media pundits will draw their own conclusions, while voters will tend to believe whichever side they support. This will only deepen the social rift and increase mistrust.
Third, it would stop firearm attacks from happening again and again. By delaying the election for a week, it would make it impossible for assailants who use violence to air their grievances or to smear political opponents from achieving their purpose. During the interim, the various political camps would demand that the police and prosecution act swiftly to find out and publicize the true facts of the case.
Even if the authorities fail to clear up the case during this period, the delay would allow time for voters to calm down, thereby minimizing the number of sympathy votes and their effect on elections. If potential attackers are denied the opportunity to influence elections, they would be discouraged from resorting to such extreme actions.
Some people may argue that delaying an election by a week would increase the social burden and costs of campaigning, but when compared with the grievous consequences of election results being thrown into doubt because of shooting incidents, it is a small price to pay.
Tim Hsu is an ssociate professor of law at Chinese Culture University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS