Wed, Sep 03, 2025 page8

• Ker Chien-ming’s strange antics

  • By Paul Lin 林保華
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) has been acting rather oddly since in January proposing a recall targeting the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) 39 legislators who were directly elected, as well as two independents, while calling on Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) and Deputy Legislative Speaker Johnny Chiang (江啟臣), one of the 39, to step down.

  Ker suddenly became eager to give interviews and issued lengthy statements outlining his views, yet his ideas differed from those of President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration.

  As the government appears unwilling to distance itself from Ker, it has twice attributed his behavior to the immense pressure he faces within the DPP. Still, as the party’s most senior frontline figure, if he cannot withstand the strain, why does he insist on remaining in his position? After all, his colleagues are also under intense pressure.

  Ker’s unusual behavior became apparent after last year’s presidential and legislative election results were announced. With the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) winning a combined majority in the legislature, a normal politician would have tried everything to win over the TPP. Even if forming a permanent alliance was impossible, the TPP should not have been given the opportunity to completely align with the KMT. That is why there were voices within the DPP calling for TPP Legislator Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) to be nominated as legislative speaker. An ideal outcome would have been a member of the TPP elected speaker alongside a member of the DPP as her deputy. Even if Huang had been paired with a KMT deputy, that would have been better than the KMT taking both posts.

  However, Ker dismissed Huang entirely by calling her a “female version” of Han, a comment that has no basis. While Huang is not at heart part of the pan-green camp, during her time as a Taipei city councilor, she was relatively neutral and was not hostile toward the DPP.

  Moreover, in the latter stages of campaigning last year, when former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) attempted to coax former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), then the chairman of the TPP, into signing an unfavorable agreement with the KMT, Huang opposed the plan. Compared with TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), Vivian Huang is far cannier when it comes to advocating an alternative path for the party.

  Ker’s resoluteness gave the impression that he had already persuaded several KMT members, perhaps at the mahjong table, and was thus confident that his party would win the speaker and deputy speaker positions.

  History shows that any such confidence was unfounded.

  For the DPP, being the minority in the legislature would present great challenges, but Ker maintained his certainty. Was he being foolishly brave, or did he have another calculation in mind?

  After his certainty was shown to be unfounded, he championed the two-stage recall — a proposal that was not only unworkable, but also deepened hostilities.

  Having spent many years in politics, Ker is by no means reckless. When rumors began to spread in early February that the views of Ker and Lai differed over the recall issue, Ker said that he had long worked on the same team as Lai and Presidential Office Secretary-General Pan Men-an (潘孟安), and that the three had a strong mutual understanding. The implication was that Ker taking the lead on the recall plan was a part of that understanding. His intentional ambiguity gave the impression that he was representing the central leadership’s position.

  An outright denial by Lai could have been seen as an attempt to douse the recall efforts, but at the same time, Lai could not deny that he and Ker were on the same team.

  In December last year, the Legislative Yuan voted on Lai’s nominations for the Constitutional Court. All seven nominees were rejected by the KMT caucus, six were rejected by TPP legislators and one — Liu Ching-yi (劉靜怡), a professor in the Graduate Institute of National Development at National Taiwan University — was rejected by the DPP.

  Ironically, Liu was the only nominee approved of by the TPP.

  Reports indicated that Ker called Lai about one hour before voting was held on the nominees, telling him that the DPP caucus would uphold its autonomy in the legislature. Lai told him he respected their autonomy. Ker reportedly ordered the DPP caucus to reject Liu’s nomination because “she had insulted DPP legislators” and was a friend of Huang Kuo-chang.

  When another round of nominees was voted on in July, the DPP rejected two of them. Are Constitutional Court justices meant to serve the entire nation or just the DPP? Could it be that Ker does not want the Constitutional Court to function properly?

  I began hearing negative rumors about Ker from the moment I entered politics. Yet I believe that all political parties need a lubricant of sorts — something or someone that prevents internal friction without too many negative side effects.

  During the 2014 Sunflower movement — a demonstration against the then-KMT administration’s attempt to pass a proposed cross-strait service trade agreement — I observed Ker working quite well with then-legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平). The protesters’ occupation of the main legislative chamber ended peacefully, affirming my positive view of Ker.

  I never expected him to change so drastically, but with his refusal to resign despite his positions diverging from the ruling party and the president, it must be asked: Is he deliberately adding fuel to the fire, seeking to plunge the Legislative Yuan into even greater chaos?

  Paul Lin is a Taipei-based political commentator.

  Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Navy to receive torpedoes from US

  • 2

    Two arrested for public indecency after caught having sex in Kaohsiung park

  • 3

    TSMC to break ground on advanced fab in October

  • 4

    New base in Philippines positioned close to Taiwan

  • 5

    Taipei mum on rumors minister is in Philippines