Asked about the Taiwan People’s Party’s (TPP) expulsion of its former legislator-at-large Li Zhenxiu (李貞秀), TPP founder and former chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) said, “she did it to herself.”
The circumstances leading to Li’s expulsion, and the increasingly ugly fallout that has since played out in the media, could have been avoided with a little more wisdom on the part of Ko and TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌). Ko’s assessment of Li’s behavior could equally be applied to himself, Huang and the TPP’s internal processes.
Li, the first China-born spouse of a Taiwanese to serve as a lawmaker in Taiwan, was expelled following a unanimous vote by the party’s Central Evaluation Committee on Monday. The reasons given were Li’s repeated misconduct and comments that had “seriously damaged the party’s reputation and internal cohesion.”
The party neglected to mention Li’s ineligibility to serve as a legislator or its own insistence that she serve in that position, despite objections by the government and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), given the still unresolved issue of Li’s dual People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Republic of China (ROC) citizenship.
Li took her seat in the legislature in February, halfway through the legislative term due to the TPP’s “two-year” term rule, devised by Ko to provide legislative experience to the maximum number of party members.
During that time, the government and the DPP legislative caucus consistently raised concerns, despite the Central Election Commission’s approval of her candidacy, and legislative speaker Han Kuo-yu’s (韓國瑜) rejection of attempts to disqualify her.
Ko, Huang and the TPP backed her throughout, until concerns were raised by TPP members about her misconduct and inconvenient outbursts. Han, despite being a member of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), is expected to observe political neutrality in his capacity as legislative speaker. These are symptoms of the constitutional chaos that the KMT and TPP have been promoting in this legislative term.
The TPP’s headache does not end with Li’s expulsion. The party remains vulnerable to serious damage to its reputation and internal cohesion, with Li charging around like a bull in a China shop and appearing on pro-green talk shows where she criticized Huang — who she called a “hypocrite,” claiming that his continued leadership would lead to the death of the party — as well as TPP caucus director Vicky Chen (陳智菡) and TPP Secretary-General Chou Yu-hsiu (周榆修), all of whom she accused of pushing her out.
She said Huang had been aware of the dual nationality issue and that she did not qualify as a legislator, yet continued to support the legality of her position on the list, raising questions about Huang’s willingness to put rule of law over party politics.
In the same interview, conducted during the ongoing Baishatun (白沙屯) Matsu pilgrimage, Ko addressed the process by which the TPP vetted Li for inclusion on the party’s legislator-at-large list. He said the selection was open to the party as a whole for recommendations, and that the decision was made to have one person representing a Chinese spouse and another to represent a new immigrant, so the list could reflect diverse sections of society.
He then blamed his year-long detention and the mass recall movement for distracting the party from reviewing the system and said there would now be a debate within the party about whether the system should be reviewed.
This follows a familiar Ko playbook: By saying the decision to select Li was made by the party as a whole, he distanced himself from it; by blaming his detention and the recall movement, he suggested the failure to address a flawed internal process was not his responsibility; and by saying a review would follow internal debate, he deferred accountability for ensuring that a review takes place.
In a news conference fielding questions about Li’s criticisms of him, Huang said he was reluctant to spend time discussing someone who is no longer important.
The issues surrounding Li might fade, but the TPP needs to examine its own conduct and flawed processes if it is to survive as a third force in Taiwanese politics.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS