On Feb. 18 at the Munich Security Conference, Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Wang Yi (王毅) said that Taiwanese independence forces are incompatible with peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
His remarks restated what Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Politburo Standing Committee member Wang Huning (王滬寧) said when he met with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia (夏立言): “Taiwan independence is incompatible with peace.”
The use of “incompatibility” is reminiscent of a 2008 constitutional interpretation, which addressed a law that prohibited advocating “communism” or secession, ie, Taiwanese independence.
In 1998, economist and politician Chen Shih-meng (陳師孟) and others applied to the Taipei Bureau of Social Affairs to register the Goa-Seng-Lang Association for Taiwan Independence (GATI) as a local civic organization.
Their application was rejected, as at that time, Article 2 of the Civil Associations Act (人民團體法) stated that the “organization and activities of a civil association shall not advocate communism or secession from the state.”
Chen filed an administrative appeal, but the Executive Yuan dismissed it. Chen then sought a constitutional interpretation, and on June 20, 2008, the Constitutional Court (then known as the Council of Grand Justices) issued Interpretation No. 644, in which then-grand justice Hsu Tzong-li (許宗力) said in his interpretation: “Due to the idiosyncrasies of our history and politics, the Republic of China and Taiwan as two signs are either equal to or inclusive of each other; different interpretations can be made based on different political standpoints.”
In his interpretation, then-grand justice Lin Tzu-yi (林子儀) said: “If the advocacy of either communism or secession, through the means of organization or promotion, can attract some people and win over a great number of people, and successfully convince the majority of the people to support it, be it the realization of communism or the secession, the support for that advocacy should be recognized as the choice of our society, rather than an imminent danger.”
In other words, freedom of thought is guaranteed by the Constitution, and the choice made by the people of their volition should be considered first.
If the government wants people to opt for its advocacy, it should win their support, rather than prohibit them from renouncing the advocacy. As the saying goes: “The nation is founded upon the people and established for the benefit of the people.”
The “incompatibility” as stated by some, if considered alongside Interpretation No. 644, should be reviewed again.
Shih Ya-hsuan is an associate professor in National Kaohsiung Normal University’s Department of Geography.
Translated by Liu Yi-hung
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS