The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and its chairman and former presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) are embroiled in a series of political donation scandals, and many believe the political ramifications could be significant, threatening the party’s future.
In the past two weeks, analysts questioned the party’s use of political donations it received during the election campaign, based on donation disclosure data published by the Control Yuan.
The data showed that Ko’s campaign office made several questionable payments to marketing companies, including the marketing firm Muko (木可行銷公關). Two marketing companies said they did not receive the three payments totaling NT$9.16 million (US$285,982) that the party declared, while one marketing company said Muko owed it more than NT$13 million for services it delivered. A marketing company was also questioned about how it received three payments totaling NT$10 million for promotional services within three months after it changed its name in May last year.
The TPP apologized for misreporting the three payments adding to NT$9.16 million, but on Monday last week, it found that 17 records were unreported or misreported, bringing the total to NT$18.17 million.
The party said an accountant they hired, surnamed Tuanmu (端木), was at fault for “cutting corners.” Meanwhile, Ko did not apologize, but said he “failed to recognize the persons’ true colors and recruited the wrong people,” blaming Tuanmu, his election campaign manager TPP Legislator Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) and chief financial officer Lee Wen-tsung (李文宗). He also tried to downplay the scandals by saying that it was the first time the party ran in a presidential election.
However, it was also revealed that managers and employees of some of the marketing companies, including Muko, were members of Ko’s campaign office, raising more questions about whether the TPP made fraudulent financial declarations.
In other developments, questioned about why a company opened in May by Ko’s son had the same registered address as the TPP’s headquarters, Ko’s wife, Peggy Chen (陳佩琪), said they had opened a company under their son’s name — which is illegal as she is a civil servant — then later said her son opened the company on his own.
Ko is also entangled in scandals regarding two real-estate projects — the Core Pacific City Mall (京華城) redevelopment and the Beitou Shilin Science Park (北投士林科技園區) — conducted when he was Taipei mayor. City councilors have set up two investigative committees and have invited Ko to attend, but so far he has declined the invitation.
Ko has run twice for mayor and the five-year-old TPP has had candidates running in mayoral elections, so pretending to be amateurs is far-fetched.
Article 20 and 21 of the Political Donations Act (政治獻金法) stipulate that the party, candidate or designated persons must keep an account of income and expenditures. The party or candidate should also sign the report, and have it audited and attested by an accountant, so having the accountant “compile” and “audit” the report as the TPP claims seems very questionable.
Moreover, Ko, who for years has touted himself as being “open and transparent,” “uncorrupted and frugal” and someone who maintains “financial discipline,” has harshly criticized the two major political parties for being corrupt and wasting large sums of money during election campaigns, now finds himself being scrutinized by the same principles.
Ko and the TPP have projected the image that they are clean from corruption and the “nontransparent” politics of the two-party system, attracting mostly young people who wish to see a new third force in politics. That image is now being seriously challenged. If the TPP or Ko are unable to clarify their accounts and take responsibility for their “mistakes,” more supporters are likely to lose faith in the party and its chairman, pushing it to the margins and leaving it less of a player in Taiwanese politics.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS