DPP’s inexplicability
The Legislative Yuan’s Internal Administration Committee on Thursday reviewed amendments to the Referendum Act (公民投票法). The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which has always opposed allowing referendums on territorial changes, said there is no longer any reason to oppose it. Surprisingly, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which used to support holding such referendums, appeared to have changed its mind, saying territorial changes would require amending the Constitution.
Despite its flip-flopping, the KMT holds the view that the public should decide. On the other hand, the DPP’s flip-flopping is inexplicable. What is there to be afraid of? The territory as defined in the Constitution does not reflect the current territorial “status quo,” which is certainly problematic. Although a referendum is not at the same level as the Constitution, the former allows the public to directly express their opinions. Why would the DPP view amending the Constitution as a reason not to allow referendums on the issue? Perhaps it is opposed to it just to please China, as some suspect.
Amending the Constitution is a complex process, but it should always reflect public opinion. Similarly, a referendum is decided by a majority of voters. Both are based on the idea of popular sovereignty. If referendums can help the public exercise their constitutional rights, why oppose it?
The DPP returned to power because it understood public opinion, but if it continues to find excuses or hesitate on this issue, the public will eventually see through it.
Chi An-hsiu
Taipei
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
The wrap-up press event on Feb. 1 for the new local period suspense film Murder of the Century (世紀血案), adapted from the true story of the Lin family murders (林家血案) in 1980, has sparked waves of condemnation in the past week, as well as a boycott. The film is based on the shocking, unsolved murders that occurred at then-imprisoned provincial councilor and democracy advocate Lin I-hsiung’s (林義雄) residence on Feb. 28, 1980, while Lin was detained for his participation in the Formosa Incident, in which police and protesters clashed during a pro-democracy rally in Kaohsiung organized by Formosa Magazine on Dec.
Watching news footage of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials shaking hands and exchanging pleasantries with their counterparts across the Taiwan Strait, I could not help but feel a profound sense of temporal displacement. As a member of the generation born after the lifting of martial law and raised under modern civic education, I truly want to ask the KMT: “Do you not see who the true villain is?” In 1949, the Chinese Communist Party used a bloody civil war to drive the KMT into exile in Taiwan. In the decades that followed, it has sought to completely erase the existence
With the Year of the Snake reaching its conclusion on Monday next week, now is an opportune moment to reflect on the past year — a year marked by institutional strain and national resilience. For Taiwan, the Year of the Snake was a composite of political friction, economic momentum, social unease and strategic consolidation. In the political sphere, it was defined less by legislative productivity and more by partisan confrontation. The mass recall movement sought to remove 31 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators following the passage of controversial bills that expanded legislative powers and imposed sweeping budget cuts. While the effort