Saturday’s four referendums have caused a catfight between supporters and opponents, when, strictly speaking, the four questions are not even fit to be put to referendums, which are designed to make up for shortcomings in the legislature.
Moreover, such questions should be comprehensible and accessible to the public, not overly complicated.
For example, the third question regarding restarting construction at the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District (貢寮) directly concerns only people who reside in the area, while people in southern areas might not give their vote on the issue due consideration.
Similarly, the question over relocating a liquefied natural gas terminal project to protect algal reefs in Taoyuan has little bearing on people who live elsewhere in Taiwan.
Supporters of the referendum should not assume that others will follow suit just because it is in the name of environmental protection, because there are issues of the economy, air pollution and ecological balance to consider.
The four questions are not beyond the power of the legislative process, but malicious politicians have used the referendums to start a partisan catfight.
If every minor issue is put to a referendum, what is the purpose of the legislature and local councils?
If even experts differ over how to vote in the referendums, how can the public be expected to understand the issues clearly?
Some say that the Referendum Act (公民投票法) has been a sham since the legislature in 2017 lowered the threshold for proposing questions. If the act is amended so that referendums are again held alongside general elections, chaos can once again be expected at polling stations in next year’s legislative elections and in the 2024 presidential election.
The legislature’s 2017 revisions reduced the first-round proposal threshold from 0.005 to 0.0001 of the electorate in the most recent presidential election. For example, if the total electorate was 17 million, 1,700 signatures would be required — not a difficult task to achieve.
The second-round threshold was lowered from 5 to 1.5 percent of the electorate, which based on the 17 million figure would be 255,000 signatures, a walk in the park for a top political party.
A referendum passes if one-quarter of eligible people cast a “yes” vote, and the number of “yes” votes surpasses “no” votes, meaning that a party needs to mobilize 4.25 million people, with the final result depending on which side gets more votes.
For politicians who want to use referendums to start a partisan fight, such easy thresholds are too good to pass up. No matter which party is in office, the act will continue to be a thorn in the flesh if it is not amended.
Political hacks are happy to promote restarting the construction at the hazardous Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in the name of energy production, while also opposing the natural gas terminal. They put protecting reefs above energy production and, apparently, above the lives of Taiwanese.
If this is not political strife, then I do not know what is.
Chuang Sheng-rong is a lawyer.
Translated by Rita Wang
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS