The Taipei District Court on Nov. 1 agreed to extend the detention of Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for his suspected involvement in corruption involving a real-estate project during his time as Taipei mayor. Different voices are beginning to emerge from within the TPP about how to respond to their extended leaderless situation.
Following a string of scandals coming to light since early August, including the TPP’s misreporting of election campaign finances and Ko’s alleged corruption related to the Core Pacific City redevelopment project, Ko on Aug. 29 announced he would take a three-month leave of absence from his leadership role.
Ko has been detained and held incommunicado since Sept. 6. The extension means he could be held until Jan. 4, exceeding his three-month leave. Many people have begun speculating about the party’s solution to this issue.
The TPP’s charter states that if the chairperson resigns or is unable to perform their duties, the Central Review Committee should elect an acting chairperson, and if the chairperson has more than one year remaining in their term, a by-election for a new chairperson should be held within six months from their absence.
TPP Taichung City Councilor Chiang Ho-shu (江和樹), who is also a member of the committee, on Nov. 1 said he would propose to allow Ko’s leave to be “extended indefinitely,” and that he would publicize the names of committee members who did not agree. However, two days later, he said if Ko does not take extended leave, he would vote for TPP caucus whip Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) as the party’s acting chairperson.
Taichung City Government advisor Tsai Pi-ru (蔡壁如), who is a founding member of the party, former legislator and has been an aide to Ko for more than 30 years, said she seconds electing Huang as acting chairperson, but is also willing to step in and run for chairperson if the party needs her.
Unwilling to comment on the issue, Huang on Monday last week said the most important thing is for the party to stand in unity, and for every member to perform their duties well. On Wednesday, he cooperated with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers in passing a preliminary review of the KMT’s amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) in just three minutes and without discussion.
However, TPP Legislator Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) on the same day criticized the KMT for “rashly rushing through” the review, without even holding discussions. Vivian Huang, who is a former Taipei deputy mayor, had previously been seen as a potential acting chairperson, but is now out of the running, as her party membership was suspended in August following scandals.
Her action is viewed by many as the two Huangs not seeing eye to eye, and stirred speculation that the KMT might be gradually cutting ties with the TPP, especially as Ko is likely to face prosecution.
Meanwhile, as TPP officials show solidarity in supporting Ko’s innocence, framing his detention as “political persecution” by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, their uncertainty about the party’s future is surfacing, especially as evidence suggests an increased likelihood of Ko’s involvement in corruption, and polls suggesting Ko and the TPP are losing public trust.
The Taipei District Court on Wednesday ordered that the Core Pacific City project’s land be seized and mentioned Ko as having accepted bribes. Recent polls have shown that the majority of the public do not support the KMT-TPP’s blocking of the government’s budget review, agree with the Constitutional Court’s ruling that most of the KMT-TPP-proposed “legislative reform” amendments are unconstitutional, and do not believe Ko is innocent.
While the TPP, a party centered around Ko, has for two months put off the discussion of electing a new chairperson to lead the party, Chiang’s proposal to support Huang Kuo-chang as leader has brought unspoken questions to the surface, and is expected to stir up more uncertainties and debates in the coming days.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS