The Central Election Commission last week issued a strong rebuttal of an online rumor that it was using procedural jiggery-pokery to suppress the electorate’s voting rights, which, it was claimed, would deter a large section of the public from voting.
Its decision to issue separate ballots and ballot boxes for the proposed referendums to be held alongside the nine-in-one local elections stemmed from a difference in the minimum voting ages for elections (20 years) and referendums (18 years).
How did such a muddle develop? If the voting age for both was 18, there would be no basis for the rumors and the commission would not have needed to design such complicated and confusing measures.
The legal voting age for referendums was last year lowered from 20 to 18 through an amendment to the Referendum Act (公民投票法).
However, the change was not extended to elections, so 18 and 19-year-olds have been given the power to vote on important matters in referendums, but are not deemed old enough to select candidates in elections.
As the Legislative Yuan saw fit to pass the amendment, the hope is that legislators would fully implement intergenerational justice by reducing the voting age for elections to 18.
This could be achieved simply by amending Article 130 of the Constitution, and would bring Taiwan in line with other democratic nations.
One of the proposed referendums addresses whether “Taiwan” should be used for the national sports team at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.
A series of “anti” referendums has been proposed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), through which it seeks to overturn government policy on air pollution and nuclear power, food from regions affected by the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster, the construction of a new Shenao Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Rueifang District (瑞芳) and same-sex marriage.
These proposals touch upon matters crucial to the nation’s future. How can legislators grant 18-year-olds the right to vote on these far-reaching issues, but prevent them from taking part in electing government officials?
Legislators have failed to complete voting age reform, delivering only a messy compromise that insults young voters.
Democratic Progressive Party politicians — custodians of the temporary majority in government granted to them by the electorate — must live up to the “democratic” and “progressive” in their party’s name by allowing people to vote in referendums and elections from the age of 18.
None of the referendums proposes lowering the voting age in elections to 18, but the hope remains that intergenerational justice would become a reality sooner rather than later.
Hung Yu-chiang is director of Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital’s Chinese medicine department.
Translated by Edward Jones
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS