Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) sparked a controversy for allegedly pressuring a police officer not to give her a parking ticket.
On Tuesday last week, she and her husband parked their vehicle in a no parking zone in a lane along Guangfu S Road in the capital before going into a restaurant. The officer’s body cam footage, which was later released, showed Hsu’s husband emerging from the restaurant and spotting the officer checking their vehicle’s license plate. The police officer told him that he would be receiving a parking ticket.
Hsu joined the men, pulled down her mask and identified herself, informing the police officer that the car belonged to her.
“I thought if the driver was around, you just gave a verbal warning? This is what other police officers told me,” Hsu said. “So do you go directly to handing out parking tickets now?”
Telling the officer several times to go ahead and write up the ticket, Hsu said: “We can settle this later.”
Her husband again urged the officer to give them the ticket, saying that it would put them in a “difficult situation” not to receive one, while the officer told them that giving them the ticket would put him in “an even more difficult” situation. The officer finally let them go without issuing the ticket.
Later, someone posted the incident on the Professional Technology Temple (PTT) online bulletin board, accusing Hsu of abusing her power, while the police officer was given two reprimands for “malfeasance.”
The incident fueled furious debate among politicians and the public, where deep-blue KMT members, such as Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), left messages of support for Hsu, while members of the public lambasted her for using her position to avoid being fined.
Hsu has so far not offered a formal apology for the incident, but said in a statement: “This has severely damaged my reputation and the situation has been extremely stressful. That’s why I intend to sue.”
That an incident involving a NT$900 ticket could turn into such a controversy reveals several issues:
First, the incident could give people the impression that politicians enjoy certain privileges. This would be a huge setback for politicians, who have been trying to polish their image over the past few years. They would like the public to believe that undue influence has long been abolished, that all are equal under the law, but Hsu has shown that corruption has yet to be completely uprooted.
Second, Internet users have interpreted Hsu’s “we can settle this later” to mean that she intended to talk to the officer’s supervisor, which purportedly was the reason he was reprimanded. After all, city councilors review police department budgets. The officer’s punishment is likely to lower the morale of other officers carrying out their duties.
Third, Hsu’s response following the incident has only reinforced the KMT’s negative image. As a rising star in the party, Hsu had a fresh image, but the support from deep-blue members only attracted deep-blue voters, while her ineffective apology and apparent lack of contrition have alienated everyone else.
KMT leaders — from KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) to Taipei mayoral candidate Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) — have remained silent. The incident has shown that Taiwanese prefer fairness and justice over corruption and abuses of power.
Even for something as trivial as a parking infraction, the wiser approach would have been to just accept the ticket and go.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS