Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) is in deep trouble over the handling of his presidential campaign funds and is now facing legal action.
Responding to the case, Ma Ying-jeou Foundation director Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑) said that if the controversy adversely affects Ko, it would be also be bad news for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
Why does the development of the KMT depend so much on what happens to Ko at this point?
What is interesting is that neither Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) office nor the KMT itself seems to be overly bothered about whether the particulars of the case in which Ko is accused involves any contraventions of the law.
They also do not seem too concerned about how Ko should account for himself to the public, or clarify what went on or the part he played in the whole sorry affair. Rather, they are only interested in what this means for the KMT and the party’s interests.
Politics concerns the interests of the public. Therefore, how political figures perceive the “rule of law” and how they go about making sure it is protected is very much something the public should scrutinize. The electorate needs to know that it can trust politicians to use their power appropriately. If politicians are solely concerned with the prospects of their cooperation with other parties so that they can maximize the benefits of such alliances and the development of their own party, then it is clear that they would fall short of the public’s expectations.
The TPP has been hemorrhaging support ever since it threw in its lot with the KMT to help pass the controversial legislative reform bills. Now, on top of the falling support with the electorate, the party and its chairman, Ko, have been caught up in this case of unclear accounting of its election expenses. The TPP is bound to lose more support from voters.
By calling for openness and transparency, as well as justice and fairness, Ko had attracted some intellectuals and young voters. Now that even his presidential campaign funds are unclear, how can his supporters believe he is a “clean” politician or believe in his political competence?
As for the KMT, it should not be happy with the case, and should review itself with caution. It should not only think about the impact of the controversy on the future cooperation between the two parties, or how to defeat the Democratic Progressive Party in the next election. A party is regressive if its development depends on another party.
The KMT should seriously review that relationship. In the presidential election, why did its theme of another power transfer fail to win recognition? It should review whether it has won the hearts of the people and whether it has a clear conscience in terms of national identity, the discipline of its party members and the political atmosphere it creates.
Chen Chi-nung is principal of Shuili Junior High School in Nantou County.
Translated by Eddy Chang
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
As technological change sweeps across the world, the focus of education has undergone an inevitable shift toward artificial intelligence (AI) and digital learning. However, the HundrED Global Collection 2026 report has a message that Taiwanese society and education policymakers would do well to reflect on. In the age of AI, the scarcest resource in education is not advanced computing power, but people; and the most urgent global educational crisis is not technological backwardness, but teacher well-being and retention. Covering 52 countries, the report from HundrED, a Finnish nonprofit that reviews and compiles innovative solutions in education from around the world, highlights a
RSS