As Taiwan’s political parties prepare for next month’s election of a new legislative speaker, incoming Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator-at-large Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) says that one of his reasons for seeking the post is to keep an eye on the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s corruption. Han accused the DPP government of corruption when he ran for president in 2020 and again when he was supporting New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi’s (侯友宜) presidential bid this month, and he is still saying the same thing.
The speaker and deputy speaker of the Legislative Yuan are supposed to be administratively neutral, so any legislator who wants to supervise the DPP government had better not serve in those roles.
This is precisely why Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), who has declared his intention to strictly supervise the ruling party, said that he would not stand for election to either of these posts.
Evidently, the accusations of DPP government corruption that slip so easily off Han’s tongue are just populist rhetoric. Han often tells voters that the DPP is corrupt, but how does this measure up against the facts?
During the presidential campaign, Han and Hou’s campaign headquarters accused the DPP of major corruption in two government procurement cases, namely that of COVID-19 vaccines made by Taiwan’s Medigen Vaccine Biologics Corp and that of eggs imported to relieve a domestic shortage.
However, although prosecutors have handled 62 cases concerning the Medigen vaccine, they concluded that there were no unlawful activities involved. They also found no evidence of corruption or other unlawful activity in relation to the egg imports.
In contrast, a KMT staffer concocted bogus “death threats” related to the egg imports, arousing public suspicions that the KMT was not acting in good faith.
These examples illustrate how the accusations that Han and other opposition party figures make about DPP corruption are no more than populist verbiage.
Of course, there is such a thing as corruption by governing parties, even in democratic nations. For example, it happened when Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), now chairman of the TPP, was mayor of Taipei, and also in some cases where the DPP was in office.
However, when it comes to the degree of corruption, neither of these parties compare to the KMT.
For example, former Nantou County commissioner Lee Chao-ching (李朝卿) of the KMT was convicted of taking more than 120 kickbacks between 2008 and 2012, mostly for post-typhoon reconstruction projects. Lee received prison sentences adding up to more than 400 years, to be served concurrently for 16 years and six months.
In Taiwan, if you say that a certain political party is corrupt, such a comment is regarded as free speech that is open to public discussion. That being the case, the party that has been accused of corruption cannot sue the accuser for defamation.
Consequently, this kind of rhetoric is often used by populists who want to attack their enemies without being held legally responsible.
Han’s mantra of claiming that the DPP’s corruption is serious is typical of how some politicians attack opposing political parties in Taiwan’s populist political environment.
Liu Shih-ming is an adjunct associate professor in the Graduate School of Taiwanese Culture at National Taipei University of Education.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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