Saturday’s presidential and legislative elections have attracted the attention of the international community, and Taiwan’s voting procedure has generated much discussion and debate.
On an election day, voters first have their ID cards checked by staff upon arrival at the polling station, followed by voters putting a stamp or fingerprint on the name list. Voters then receive the ballots and mark whom they wish to vote for using the tools prepared by the election commission. Voters then fold the ballots in half and deposit them into ballot boxes according to the paper’s colors.
After polling, staff members manually count the ballots one by one, read the vote out loud and display it to the attending witnesses. After the counting at stations is completed, managers compile a written report of the results and post it on the bulletin board outside the station and then designate a courier to deliver the station results to the township electoral operation centers, so the results can be entered into a centralized computing system.
The Counting and Information Center for Election provides real-time election results. The public can check up-to-date polling counts through the Central Election Commission’s (CEC) Web site on election day.
While some have praised Taiwan’s voting system as transparent and prudent, some have called it obsolete for not incorporating electronic voting, postal voting and prepoll voting.
In face of China’s nefarious ploys to interfere in Taiwan’s elections, the current system — including in-person voting, paper ballots and manual counting — can prevent China’s hacking or electronic rigging.
Nevertheless, the linking between place of residence and voting rights have inconvenienced people and prevented those working or studying abroad, polling station staff and on-duty security officers from exercising their voting rights, while prisoners are also deprived of their rights.
According to the demographic breakdown released by the CEC, it is apparent that an aged society and low birthrate are the underlying reasons for generational conflicts. For young people working or studying away from their registered residence, the distance, the amount of traffic and time to travel discourage them from voting. On the other hand, retired elderly living in their registered residence have a higher turnout rate than young people. If the government wishes to introduce prepoll voting, postal voting or electronic voting, to ensure privacy and information security, it should wait until the technology matures and society reaches a consensus on the issue. To protect the voting rights of every citizen, conducting “nonresidence voting” by allowing people to vote near one’s place of study or work is a feasible direction for reform.
Jiang Zung-shiang is a lawyer. He holds a master’s degree in law from National Defense University.
Translated by Rita Wang
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS