[Freedom House] Map of Freedom: TAIWAN 2008

Freedom in the World 2008 (Map of Freedom 2008)


Report on Taiwan (2008)

Capital: Taipei

Population: 22,900,000

Political Rights Score: 2
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free
Overview

Taiwan’s political elite became embroiled in a series of corruption scandals in 2007 that tarnished the reputation of leading figures in both the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the opposition Kuomintang (KMT). Meanwhile, in the run-up to the 2008 legislative and presidential elections, cross-strait relations and the issue of “Taiwan identity” took center stage, much to the alarm of officials in both Beijing and Washington. (Read Details)

Freedom House Calls for Inquiry into Taiwan Clashes [Press Release]

Washington
November 20, 2008

Freedom House urges Taiwan's government to create an independent commission to thoroughly investigate clashes between police and activists protesting Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin's historic visit and recommend needed reforms.

"A public investigation of the violence—which involved both sides—will send a critical message that the new government of President Ma Ying-jeou is interested in upholding the democratic values of transparency and accountability," said Jennifer Windsor, Freedom House executive director. "The inquiry should examine evidence on both sides and recommend any needed reforms to police practices and the legal framework governing demonstrations."

Hundreds of university students are currently staging a sit-in in Taipei's Freedom Square and several other cities to protest the government's handling of the incident. During Chen’s visit, police reportedly used heavy-handed tactics—including physical assault, arbitrary detention and destruction of property—to prevent Chen from seeing symbols of Taiwanese or Tibetan independence, as well as broader demonstrations against the Chinese regime. Demonstrators also employed violence against police, throwing rocks and petrol bombs outside Chen's hotel on November 6.

The clashes reveal a need for police to undergo crowd control training that adheres to the standards used in other democracies. Likewise, demonstrators and political advocacy groups must recommit themselves to orderly protests that avoid violence under any circumstances.

The inquiry commission should examine controversial passages in Taiwan's Assembly and Parade Law, such as restrictions on where people are allowed to demonstrate, and determine whether they need to be liberalized to protect citizens' rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The commission should also investigate claims that police are selectively enforcing the law.

The visit by Chen, the most senior Chinese official to visit Taiwan since it split from China in 1949, and the recent arrests of several opposition party figures are raising concerns that that President Ma and his Kuomintang Party may rollback democratic freedoms.

"The government must renew its commitment to tolerating robust freedom of assembly and peaceful protest, no matter what the cause," said Windsor.

Taiwan is ranked Free in the 2008 edition of Freedom in the World, Freedom House's survey of political rights and civil liberties, and in the 2008 version of Freedom of the Press. (Original page)

Freedom House, an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom in the world, has been monitoring political rights and civil liberties in Taiwan since 1972.

News ombudsmen needed to guarantee free press

http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=792511&lang=eng_news&cate_img=49.jpg&cate_rss=news_Society_TAIWAN

Rethinking Taiwan's democratization in light of the European experience

As I criticized Taiwanese people so much the last days, I want to show, that there was also some quality in discussions of the past:

Rethinking Taiwan's democratization in light of the European experience
--Speech on the occasion of Europe Day 2005


Li-chiun Cheng
National Youth Commission minister

...

http://blog.roodo.com/lccheng/archives/152998.html

Today: Nothing happened in Taipei

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Except that some immature lawmakers could not agree to give the people one of the human rights, the right of freedom of assembly. And they were not even able to simply take one of many law examples from more developed democratic countries all over the world.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/20/2003429064

Nov 18th Press Release from the Wild Strawberries Movement

The Executive Yuan has raised the issue of revisions to the Parade and Assembly Law recently. However, the new version adopts a “compulsory registration system” whose content preserves restrictions including “assembling without registration is illegal”, “establishing forbidden areas”, “police have the right to alter the time, place, and form of the parade”, “the police can command dissolution of the parade without explicit standards”, and “the criminal and administrative sanctions relating to assembly”. Namely, the revision contains no practical improvements, only the change of name from “permission” to “registration”.

The Wild Strawberries question the statements President Ma made few days ago. What did he imply about the “registration system”? Is it compulsory or voluntary? Or is it that President Ma cannot distinguish between these two completely different systems?

The Wild Strawberries Movement cannot accept the revision. Initially, all the revisions proposed by KMT legislators Chu Feng-tz (朱鳳芝) and Cheng Li-wen (鄭麗文), as well as members of the DPP, were aimed at a voluntary registration system, but these were dropped from the final revisions. The Wild Strawberries urge both parties to support a voluntary registration system.

The Internal Affairs Committee of the Legislative Yuan will draw up modifications of the Parade and Assembly Law on November 19th. In order to supervise the Legislative Yuan’s procedures, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights will hold a large assembly at 8:45 am tomorrow in front of Legislative Yuan (No.1, Chungshan S. Rd). They intend to besiege the Legislative Yuan, and make a detour each hour. Further, there will be a farewell ceremony for the Assembly and Parade Law on 10 o’clock. The activity is expected to be held for at least half, if not the whole day, and the students involved in the Wild Strawberries Movement will come out to support this activity.

The Wild Strawberries want to stress that they never raise funds outside of Liberty Square (自由廣場), for there have been individuals going around Taipei raising money pretending to be Wild Strawberries. Please do not give money to anyone outside of the Liberty Square Demonstration.

[Taipei Times] Alternative referendum necessary

By Cho Hui-wan 卓慧菀

Thursday, Feb 21, 2008, Page 8

The US is reportedly continuing to put strong pressure on the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and even both parties' presidential candidates in the hope of stopping both the DPP's referendum on applying for UN membership as a new member under the name "Taiwan," and the KMT's referendum on returning to the UN under any practical name.

The two referendums have already harmed cross-strait relations and lead to a new low point in US-Taiwan relations. It is time for the DPP and KMT to reconsider. The two parties should negotiate and then let the legislature come up with a new referendum proposal to replace the proposals now before us.

The new proposal could ask: "Based on every person's human right to participate in international cooperation through their government, and the UN's principle of universality established on this right, do you agree that the UN should not exclude Taiwan?"

The main difference between this proposal and the two proposed referendums is the actor. In the DPP and KMT versions, the actor is Taiwan; in the new proposal, it's the UN. Through such wording, the Taiwanese could clearly tell the international community that the UN should not exclude Taiwan.

Some might ask what the logic is in holding a referendum about the actions of the UN? But if Taiwan wants to be a member of the world body, it not only needs to apply for membership, the UN also has to agree to let Taiwan in. President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has said that even if a referendum on UN membership passes, it does not mean that Taiwan will be granted membership. (Full Text)

[Taipei Times] Oct 27 Hunger strike continues at the Legislative Yuan

By Flora Wang STAFF REPORTER Monday, Oct 27, 2008, Page 3

Several pro-localization activists led by the Taiwan Association of University Professors (TAUP) continued their hunger strike in front of the legislature yesterday.

Wearing black T-shirts with the slogans “Taiwan is my country” and “Love Made in Taiwan,” the protesters are demanding an amendment to the Referendum Law (公投法).

The law, enacted by the Chinese Nationalist Party-dominated (KMT) legislature in 2003, stipulates that the number of signatures required for a referendum proposal to be reviewed is 0.5 percent of the voters who participated in the most recent presidential election — or approximately 80,000 individuals — with an additional 5 percent signatures from the population needed for a referendum to be held.

The law has long been criticized by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) as a “bird cage” law. The DPP has made several attempts to have the law amended over the past several years, but its proposals never clear the legislative floor.

The protesters began the hunger strike after participating in the opposition rally on Ketagalan Boulevard on Saturday. They have remained in front of the legislature since, with posters written in Chinese, Japanese and English demanding an amendment to the Referendum Law.

“I’m protesting against the Legislative Yuan by staging a hunger strike,” TAUP chairman Tsai Ting-kuei (蔡丁貴) said. “I will stay here until the law is amended.”

Tsai called for changes to the high thresholds stipulated in the law for a referendum to be passed.

A participant at the hunger strike surnamed Chueh (闕) said that everyone in Taiwan should stand up and oppose the KMT administration’s pro-China policy, saying it was “a matter of life and death.” (Original Page)

[David on Formosa] Hunger strike for referendum law amendment

The Taiwan Association of University Professors is currently staging a hunger strike in Jinan Road, Taipei next to the Legislative Yuan. The hunger strike began on Saturday evening after the 1025 Safeguard Taiwan protest that drew half a million people. (Full Text)

Photos on Flickr

[On-going social activity] [TAUP hunger strike sit-in] appeal to the governent to amend the referendum law

Dear readers,
Thanks for your attention and patience on Wild Strawberries Movement for days. In fact, there are a group of profs. from Taiwan Association of University Professors who have been sitting in the Quen-Xian Building (群賢樓) in Legislative Yuan for 15 days too. They request the Yuan to revise and modify the referendum law. Referendum: noun [C] (FORMAL plebiscite) a vote in which all the people in a country or an area are asked to give their opinion about or decide an important political or social question. (Cambridge Dictionary)
I would like to draw you attention on this on-going social activity which is relevant to the revolution should be done in Taiwan as well. If you only want to know about the Wild Strawberries Movement, please feel free to skip this section. However, if you care about Taiwan, this is a good chance to have a further look. Furthermore, the headquarter of Wild Strawberries Movement is so far still very focusing on our three requests. Therefore, This section is only appeared on this blog.
Thanks for your understanding! Hope I inform you sufficiently! Same as the founding of our movement, I also need some volunteers to help with collecting and translating relevant articles on on-going social activities. Please write to taiwanstudentmovement2008@gmail.com

Best to you and to Taiwan,

The Wind of Change

Rest for a while and listen to it:

People remember, there is a constitution:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2008/11/19/2003429024

The president feels suddenly the need of a free press:
http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=791186&lang=eng_news&cate_rss=news_Politics_TAIWAN

Journalists demand this right:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2008/11/19/2003429018

Do I hear justice?
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=791687&lang=eng_news&cate_img=49.jpg&cate_rss=news_Society_TAIWAN



Are there more miracles to expect if the protests continue?

Of course, there are still some of the old moral lessons, which encourage young people to work hard and become a good slave for lets call it THE SYSTEM (oh, actually that is the part they usually do not tell the people):
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/the-china-post/joe-hung/2008/11/17/183539/p3/Back-to.htm




But listen to the Wind of change, the song of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The value of a human life.

There is no philosophical discussion needed as it can be be quantified in Taiwan by an exact number:

NT$ 110,000

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/19/2003428994


If someone has further comments on the human right of health-care and medical treatment, he or she shall feel free to speak.


Update:
The health system speaks for itself!
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=792566&lang=eng_news&cate_img=49.jpg&cate_rss=news_Society_TAIWAN

[Taipei Times] Bridging a generation gap through new protest

By Wu Yi-cheng 吳易澄

Tuesday, Nov 18, 2008, Page 8

More than 20 years after the lifting of martial law, we find ourselves in an era exploding with information and ruled by the logic of business.

The younger generation has never experienced a war, but may have experienced the tail end of authoritarian rule. When they were little, they might have heard their parents say: “If you don’t behave, I’ll call the police and have you arrested.”

They now chat on the Internet, absorb knowledge from online forums and flirt with the opposite sex using text messages. The younger generation has also been given a nasty label by arrogant adults — the “strawberry generation” — because of their alleged inability to deal with pressure.

Perhaps no one has considered that behind the “geek” label and the indifference lies a silent protest against a society with too many opinions; the unwillingness to endure hardship could also be a rebellion against the paternal attitudes of society as a whole.

Nobody expected that during the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) the government would resort to heavy-handed police tactics to disperse demonstrators and then refuse to take responsibility for police excesses. This vindicates our concern: The specter of authoritarian rule has come back to life.

On Nov. 9, student demonstrators at the gate to Liberty Square in front of the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall initiated the “Wild Strawberries Movement,” a name that was arrived at through a democratic voting process on the medium they know best: the Internet.

As the movement formed, CTI-TV broadcast exclusive footage of families of police officers writing a letter to Democratic Progressive Party Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), calling on her to ask the students to go home.

I don’t know if CTI was playing dumb, if it had failed to investigate the matter or if it was a simple case of audience manipulation, but the station viewed the students as a motley group of rebels that would dance to the tune of a particular political party. Even now they think the strawberry generation is so vulnerable that it is easily divided. (Full Text)

A respond to Michael Wu’s Comment

‘How do you know that your opinions represent the public opinions of Taiwan's residents? I think most people in Taiwan feel that we are a free and democratic country. Can anyone offer scientifically reliable and valid figures to prove that most people in Taiwan would like to revise the Parade and Assembly Law? Do not tell me that your voice can represent most people in Taiwan. I don't think so.’

I am not here to represent as I do not represent and as I do not want to represent!

The beginning of every democratic process is discussion.
Some people misunderstand that politics need a leader to follow (or lets him call Führer or Duce) and democracy is if you choose your leader. That is not democracy. That is dictatorship.
I want to discuss as I think discussion is necessary and I want to help people with this, contributing ideas to this process.

So I will not speak for Taiwan as I can not speak for Taiwan, but I will explain you why I consider Taiwan not to be a full democracy.

First of all I want to define what I understand under a Democracy.

Democracy in a literal translation from ancient Greek means power of the people (δήμος [démos], people and κρατία [kratía], power).
Democracy is a form of government in which the supreme power is held completely by the people under a free electoral system.

I don’t want to talk about all the junior high school knowledge about election systems in ancient Greek cities, but go on to a modern interpretation of democracy.

My definition of democracy is a constitutional state based on Montesquieus ideas of separation of power.

In the interpretation of Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès which is the basis of modern theory of constitution, we have to distinguish between pouvoir constituant and pouvoir constitué, the sovereignty in a power separated constitutional state and the souverenity to of the people to give themselves a constitution. All state authority is derived from the people. The people are the sovereign of a democracy.


The basic principle of separation of power was de jure installed by Sun Yes-men in form of a Yuan system in the Republic of China (so we can not blame him for its fail).
There exists a constitution and in principle elections were part of this system.

De facto this system was not existing at least since the Republic of Chinas authority is restricted to Taiwan as there was is no distinction between the powers and no independent control of them in a one party state or in a military dictatorship as it was under the rule of Chiang Kai-shek.
With the occupation of Taiwan by the Republic of China the law was expanded to an area where it never got any legitimating. The authority of the state was not derived from the people who lived in this country! This situation continued for decades, until the end of the, martial law and the first ‘free’ presidential elections.

I think the step from a dictatorship to democracy needs an initial singularity in a countries history, an hour zero.
This might be a revolution (like in France) or a lost war (like in Germany).

Taiwan’s development to ‘democracy’ was a top – bottom approach. The leading party of the one party system reacted on the pressure of the people, but did not fundamentally change the system.

How many of the laws from the old time were never changed?

How many of the people in charge, responsible for the misery of so many families never lost their position?

Was there a Taiwanese Nurnberg trial, to charge the ones responsible for death and detention of thousands of Taiwanese during the dictatorship?

Didn’t the KMT still control many of the positions in the administration?

Wasn’t the KMT the richest party in the world, with a multi billion-dollar asset and ownership of companies in sensible areas like the mass media?

Isn’t the KMT still controlling direct or indirect most of the media in Taiwan?

Isn’t the national anthem still singing about the party who ruled the country alone once?

Isn’t it true that in Taiwanese TV, little girls can still sing about Chiang Kai-shek, who is in the rest of the world considered to be one of the little brothers of Hitler, Stalin and Mao?

What about the dignity of his victims? How is Taiwan honouring them?

Who is bowing to their families?

Aren’t people very creative in calling massacres or dictatorship incident or white terror?
….

There are so so many other questions, people should start to ask.

If you say, that you think most people in Taiwan feel that they are a free and democratic country, I will answer you with a quote:

‘She can talk beautifully about democracy. But she does not know how to live democracy.’

It is a famous quote by the former first lady of he United States Eleanor Roosevelt about Taiwan’s former first lady Soong May-ling.
The she could be lady Taiwan too.

If you ask many Taiwanese students about what democracy is, you will have almost no chance to get a proper answer. You cannot even get a correct definition and I am not talking about interpretations.
How can a country be a democracy, if even the best-educated persons in this country do not know what it is?

But how could they know? Who told them? How much time in their education is spent on it? Do they learn about the theory of constitutions? Do they learn about constitutional models in different times and countries? Do they learn about the political system, about the role of separated powers, about the importance of the press and about the role of political parties in a parliamentary system, …
This is what students at other places learn in high school! You should expect University students to know about this.

What about the media? Isn’t it the role of the press in a democracy to inform and educate the people in the spirit of the constitution? Isn’t the freedom of press a mayor human right that should be the basis for every constitution?

There is more or less no press qualified to fulfil this idea in Taiwan. The quality is a shame for an industrial nation and a mayor part is controlled direct or indirect by the KMT.

The people of Taiwan lack the maturity and the education as to understand their own political situation as a result of decades of government controlled and manipulated information.

It is the responsibility of a countries students and academics, to fight against this situation and to install a democratic constitutional state and a free society.

The revision of the Parade and Assembly Law will be an example how this can be done successfully and might be the beginning of a revision of the whole Taiwanese law and its parts made in a dark time in history

What are the people of Taiwan? Everything. What have they been hitherto in the political order? Nothing. What do they desire? To be something.

In inspiration of Sieyès ‘Qu’est-ce que le tiers état?’

1° Qu'est-ce que le tiers état ? Tout.
2° Qu'a-t-il été jusqu'à présent dans l’ordre politique ? Rien.
3° Que demande-t-il ? À y devenir quelque chose.

[11/16] President Ma, please immediately put into action your support for amendment to the Assembly and Parade Law!

This morning at the ROC Constitutional Law Association, President Ma made four statements regarding the Assembly and Parade Law. The Wild Strawberries Movement’s responses to these statements are as follows:

First, President Ma pointed out that for the past eight years, he supported amending the Parade and Assembly Law under which event organizers are obliged to obtain police permission before holding rallies, to enable an application-only process. We ask the President to immediately put into action his support.

Second, President Ma said that even under current regulations, 99.2% of applications are approved, which does not differ substantially from systems where approval is unnecessary. However, who are those 0.8 percent of people prohibited from demonstration? Who is authorized to decide whether to approve certain events or not? In reality, .08% is an underestimation, since many disadvantaged groups are unable to gain approval due to the practical difficulties of application.

Third, President Ma claimed that even though he supports the amendment to the Parade and Assembly Law, after the conflicts during the visit of Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), public attitudes toward the issue have become more conservative. Thus, Ma said that now the public consensus on this issue should be considered. However, we want to ask on what evidence the Presidents claim that “public attitudes have become more conservative” is based. In addition, we believe that this issue has become a focus of public attention. Given all this, the Legislative Yuan should have an official mechanism to channel the public consensus into legislative action, rather than having citizen attendance at meetings that offer no substantive engagement with the citizenry.

Finally, President Ma said that he will invite the sit-in students to participate in the discussion held by the Legislative Yuan on the amendment to the Assembly and Parade Law. We appreciate the President’s response, but we have not received an official invitation from the Legislative Yuan. We hope that under the conditions of equality and mutual trust, we will participate as citizens and have the right to a voice in the meeting.

2008/11/07 A TV talk show: The Hacker Mr. Chao (CTI TV)

The host and guests on the talk show smear that the students are manipulated by DPP. It is a peculiar phenomenon in Taiwan that this kind of so-called political talk show discusses usually nothing, but evoking and distorting the fact. It seems that they are debating and they could even show some so-called evidence. However, read it on; you will see what I am referring to.



5:19~5:34 Mr. Chao (趙少康): I believe that most of those students support the DPP.

6:00~6:50 Wang Mei-Yu (王美玉): I agree. Unless they mobilized members of DPP, Professor Tin would not bring up the fourth demand.

8:31~10:51 Tang Hsian-Long (唐湘龍): Do not use your status as a political stance even if you are students. The students also stand for a certain political view, as do the teachers serving as leaders. Among those teachers, many are members of Frank
Hsieh's(謝長廷) Army Cockerel(青年軍), who engaged in DPP activities on campuses. I don't mean they took advantage of you; however, you should face your attitudes and viewpoints toward politics honestly. Do not blur the focus of the event through innocence and youth, as if you are too pure to have any political requests.

10:51~11:40 Mr. Chao: Furthermore, I wonder about the motivation of the students. I think it is not so simple, for many of those who were caught today are people who had joined Wild Lilies(野百合) in the past. Third, I think the resistance at noon yesterday was reasonable because of the excessive enforcement of the law by the police few days ago. However, now the students are still there. Do you think Tsai Ing-Wen (蔡英文), DPP, and the crowd were right in regarding the police as being rude? Can't you make it clear after last night? In my opinion, those who are still sitting there may intend to make trouble.

16:22~18:48 Tang Hsian-Long: It's different from the Wild Lily movement. In the Wild Strawberries the professors directly in front without fear, then the crucial time starts. The leading professors are Fung Yun (范雲), Wu Rei Ren(吳叡人), and Wu Jieh Ming (吳介民). The first was my schoolmate while both of the latter two were my classmates at the university, and their attitudes toward politics are obvious. As a scholar, I think it is fine to stand for any political party. Nevertheless, these scholars should face their consciences with frankness and reveal their political stances. In addition, there is a distinct difference between the student movement now and in the past. In the past, the KMT monopolized the power; therefore we could spontaneously support student movement because we did not consent to one-party rule. But now, in a generation in which democracy has been in operation for a long time, it is unreasonable for students to engage in a political movement just because they disagree with the law. Try to resort to the two parties and be more practical. It makes no sense to organize a resistance like the Wild Lilies. The time is different.

18:49~19:18 Mr.Chao: Frankly speaking, it is their right to sit in Liberty Field(自由廣場). However, what I want to say is that they should state their political stance clearly rather than disguising it by being students, who are regarded as innocent and pure. I believe that the leaders and the main cadre members must advocate for certain party.

19:45~20:06 Mr.Chao: It is evident that they exploit their status as students. People might have sympathy toward students so that they won't be severely punished. Therefore, is it just a simple event? Is it really true that they don't belong to any party? This is my question.

20:11~21:18 Wang Mei-Yu: Taiwan has been localized, so has KMT. We have already elected presidents for four times. It is different from the time when Wild Lilies asked elder congressmen to retire and to abolish Penal Code, 100. In Taiwan, everyone definitely has freedom of speech. People deserve to have the right; it is not the charity Government serve with. As Professor Tin mentioned, this time Chen Yuen Lin (陳雲林) came to Taiwan, people were restricted from playing music, staying in Grand Hotel (圓山飯店). Those events provoke students to have a resistance. However, at 5pm yesterday, all the leaders were gone. Afterward they were regarded as rioters. Then, how do you look upon the responsibility of DPP?

21:18 Mr. Chao: Thus, he won’t show up to explain this time, then what wrong with my doubt toward him?

[Wanted] Join in a Google Group initiated by NATPA/ TAUP

I am experimenting with ways to connect Taiwan-loving people. I
created a google group named i_love_taiwan@googlegroups.com.
Currently, I envision only a few group members can post, while others
can only read. I hope the group to have more than 100,000 members in
a few weeks. The initial member pool comes from NATPA/TAUP (The two Taiwanese Professors associations in Taiwan and the States) members and wild stawberries and their friends and families. One reason it could expand very quickly is that members can invite others by visiting http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan?hl=en and click on the 'invite members' link. I encourage every Taiwan-loving person to
give the group a try. You can unsubscribe any time for any or no reason. Let us hang together for a better Taiwan.

Initially, I expect this mailing list to be a low traffic list disseminating important information. I will give you frequent updates on the direction the group is taking as it evolves. Each message you receive will include clear instruction as to how you can unsubscribe, or change the way messages are delivered, e.g., instead of receiving a message as it is sent, you can opt for a daily digest, etc. For question, please write Luby Liao at lubyliao@gmail.com

[On CNN][i-report] Observations on Taiwan Political Protests

By Neal Moore

TAIPEI & TUCHENG (CNN i-report) --- I stepped into a Taipei Taxi this morning to try to get a better understanding of the current political scene in Taiwan. What I thought would be an easy task proved to be anything but. (more)

The Rock is moving (A new assembly law for Taiwan)

After days of protest, KMT finally announces a timetable for the discussions about a new assembly law:


- November 19th: A first hearing and general discussion will be hold in the Legislative Yuan
- November 27th: the legislature will solicit opinions from experts and keep the public
informed by holding public hearing

So we can observe that the protests have been successful in the sense that the law will finally be changed.

Now the question is in which way will it be changed?
A change might range from a change of the name to a complete new law reaching western standards.

Hopefully some researchers and students of law will analyse several countries assembly laws to present them in the public hearing.



Some Ideas:

I want to present the German law here, as I am most familiar with it and as for example the Taiwanese civil law (like in Korea and Japan) is based on German civil law (they just forgot the democratic parts).

The Constitution:

First of all there is the Constitution as the last bastion of law. In the German case, the first 19 Articles declare the human rights, which are the basis of all laws.
Most Important in the defence of rights are article 1 and 20, which are unchangeable Articles of the constitution:

Article 1
[Human dignity – Human rights –
Legally binding force of basic rights]
(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be
the duty of all state authority.
(2) The German people therefore acknowledge inviolable and inalien-
able human rights as the basis of every community, of peace and of justice
in the world.
(3) The following basic rights shall bind the legislature, the executive and
the judiciary as directly applicable law.

Article 20
[Constitutional principles – Right of resistance]
(1) The Federal Republic of Germany is a democratic and social federal
state.
(2) All state authority is derived from the people. It shall be exercised by
the people through elections and other votes and through specific legisla-
tive, executive and judicial bodies.
(3) The legislature shall be bound by the constitutional order, the execu-
tive and the judiciary by law and justice.
(4) All Germans shall have the right to resist any person seeking to abol-
ish this constitutional order, if no other remedy is available.

Article 79
[Amendment of the Basic Law]
(1) This Basic Law may be amended only by a law expressly amending or
supplementing its text. In the case of an international treaty regarding a
peace settlement, the preparation of a peace settlement, or the phasing out
of an occupation regime, or designed to promote the defence of the Fed-
eral Republic, it shall be sufficient, for the purpose of making clear that the
provisions of this Basic Law do not preclude the conclusion and entry into
force of the treaty, to add language to the Basic Law that merely makes this
clarification.
(2) Any such law shall be carried by two thirds of the Members of the
Bundestag and two thirds of the votes of the Bundesrat.
(3) Amendments to this Basic Law affecting the division of the Federa-
tion into Länder, their participation on principle in the legislative process,
or the principles laid down in Articles 1 and 20 shall be inadmissible.


Independent of all other laws, these basic laws are always valid.

Assembly Law:

Now we can come to the right of assembly as given by the 8th Article of the Constitution:

Article 8
[Freedom of assembly]
(1) All Germans shall have the right to assemble peacefully and unarmed
without prior notification or permission.
(2) In the case of outdoor assemblies, this right may be restricted by or
pursuant to a law.

Restricting Laws:

The concrete laws can forbid groups or organizations to participate in demonstrations:

- Persons because of Article 18 of the constitution:

Article 18
[Forfeiture of basic rights]
Whoever abuses the freedom of expression, in particular the freedom of
the press (paragraph (1) of Article 5), the freedom of teaching (paragraph
(3) of Article 5), the freedom of assembly (Article 8), the freedom of as-
sociation (Article 9), the privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommu-
nications (Article 10), the rights of property (Article 14), or the right of
asylum (Article 16 a) in order to combat the free democratic basic order
shall forfeit these basic rights. This forfeiture and its extent shall be de-
clared by the Federal Constitutional Court.


- Parties, which are forbidden by the Constitutional Court (happened the last of two times in
1954 and is extremely difficult) or persons that support this parties.

- Other forbidden Organizations (after laws and the constitution)


Restrictions:

- It is not allowed to have weapons.
- It is not allowed t or uniforms supporting your political opinion.
(It is of course allowed for boy scouts, firemen, …)

Application:

- Organized Demonstrations need to be applied 48 hours at the local administration to give
them time to organize traffic and guarantee safety.

- Spontaneous unorganized demonstrations because of an actual reason can be hold without
application.

Prohibition or disbandment of assemblies:

In general: The normal police laws are not valid during an assembly (as it is a constitutional right). Demonstrations can only be disbanded on basis of the assembly law.

Reasons to disband a demonstration might be:

- There is no application for it (spontaneous demonstrations are excluded from this)
- The specifications on the application were faked
- Violation of a legal conditions for the demonstration
- The assembly is forbidden

Reasons to forbid a demonstration:

- Demonstrations at certain historical locations might be forbidden in general
(at the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin for example)

- In a small area around the parliament and the constitutional court, demonstrations are only allowed with an exception.

- Danger for public order and security (for example demonstrations of two enemy groups
at the same time and location)

- Glorification of Nazism or violation of the dignity of victims of Nazism


If the application of demonstrations was denied by the administration, the organizers have the right (as it is a mayor restriction of fundamental rights) of an immediate appellation at an administration court.

Because of the special situation, the constitutional court can declare all decisions of administration courts, restricting the freedom of assembly immediately as invalid.


Synopsis:

- The constitution declares the right of assembly as a fundamental right.
- Spontaneous demonstrations without application are possible.
- Laws can restrict these rights.
- As a restriction of the right to of freedom of assembly is a mayor intervention of the basic
rights, all the decisions are made or can be changed immediately by the constitutional court.


It would be nice, if other people would post other examples of assembly laws, for example in the US or Canada.

[Protest rationale] Wild Strawberries protest that the Parade and Assembly Law restricts civil rights

Today (Nov. 16th) approximately 10 students were heading to Taipei Main Station in order to spread the banner of our movement. As they ware walking along Ketagalan boulevard (the main road to the Presidential Hall), without holding any signs, and quietly, without shouting out slogans, nearby security officers claimed that they were an illegal gathering and asked them to disperse. Hsu Ren-Suo(許仁碩), the spokesman of the Wild Strawberries stated, "we consider that this case in which our fellow students were dispersed by the police has already severely violated individual freedom of movement which indicates how ridiculous the Parade and Assembly Law is."

[Taipei Times] A movement away from the political orthodoxy

A group of students and academics linked up via the Internet to launch a silent vigil, one quite different in form and purpose from the noisy mobilizations of the blue and green parties.

Their goals are very simple: Criticize police for acting outside their authority and infringing on freedom of speech in the name of security; demand that the government admit to and apologize for its errors; and call for amendments to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) where the law conflicts with freedom of expression.

The students are straightforward, sincere and deserve to be taken seriously. These are people who originally gave politics the cold shoulder and who are sick and tired of the endless war of words between pro-unification and pro-independence forces. During the overextension of police authority during Chen’s visit, the students saw the ugly face of the abuse of government power. They saw how the police were selective in approving applications for assembly, how they banned the display of the Republic of China flag in specified areas, how they gratuitously marched into a record shop and ordered the management to stop playing certain music.

To the protesters, all of these actions exceeded the boundaries of law enforcement.

The protesters’ agenda indicates that a new generation has appeared with its own way of thinking. The axis of political debate in Taiwan may gradually move away from the struggle between unification and independence forces, which the younger generation finds meaningless, toward a fight for deeper democracy and civil liberties.

Politicians should recognize the sincerity of this movement instead of smearing it. Any party that fails to recognize the shift that is taking place risks being sidelined and swept away. (Full Text)

[Taipei Times] Student sit-in protest enters 10th day

MOVEMENT: As the number of signatures on a three-point petition grew to more than 58,000, the president invited the Wild Strawberries to negotiate this week
By Shih Hsiu-chuan
STAFF REPORTER
Sunday, Nov 16, 2008, Page 1

Participants in a student sit-in protest lock themselves in cages at Liberty Square in front of National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall in downtown Taipei yesterday. They said they would remain in the cages for 24 hours.
PHOTO: LIAO CHEN-HUEI, TAIPEI TIMES

The student sit-in protest against alleged police brutality during a recent visit by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) drew more than 500 students from around the nation to Liberty Square in Taipei yesterday.

Visitors signed a three-point petition written by the students, bringing the total number of signatures backing the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement to more than 58,000, spokesman Hsu Jen-shou (?? said.

The petition called for apologies from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) over police brutality during Chen’s visit, resignations of National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明) and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞), as well as reform of the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法).

“We will continue our protest, as we haven’t received any positive response to the petition from the government,” Hsu said, adding that they were considering how to increase pressure on the government as the sit-in entered its 10th day.

One student suggested the group file a lawsuit against the police based on videotapes that allegedly show police cracking down on protesters who were waving national flags.

“No abuse of power! The president and premier must apologize,” the students shouted during the intervals between speeches and other protest activities.

A student from National Cheng Kung University and a student recently returned from the UK, both of whom wished not to be named, and Lin Yu-hsuan (林邑軒), a sociology graduate student at National Taiwan University, sat inside a prop that was designed to look like a cage to symbolize the repression of freedom of speech and human rights in the country under the Ma administration, Lin said, adding that they planned to sit inside the cages for 24 hours starting at 3pm yesterday.

Yen Chueh-an (顏厥安), a law professor at National Taiwan University, and Hsu Szu-chien (徐斯儉), an assistant research fellow at the Institute of Political Science at Academia Sinica, played Ma and Liu in a satirical skit to represent the politicians’ “arrogant” attitude toward the students.

“I don’t think we need to offer an apology. Things like this will be over in a day or two if [I] hang in there,” Hsu mimicked Liu as saying.

Liu made a similar remark on Monday during a break in an ETTV interview.

Students who couldn’t join the Taipei rally staged sit-ins in Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.

Lee Li-wei (李立偉), a student representative, said they hadn’t been told that Ma would like to communicate with the students on condition that the students give up the first two petitions, as was reported in yesterday’s Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper).

The students asked three questions of Ma — whether he agreed with criticism of excessive police force made by professor Jerome Cohen, Ma’s mentor during his studies at Harvard University; what laws and regulations were police actions were based on when stifling demonstrations against Chen; and whether Ma would like to apologize for the police intrusion into rooms booked by protesters against Chen at the Grand Hotel, where Chen stayed during his visit.

At a separate setting yesterday, Ma reiterated his willingness to reform the Assembly and Parade Law. Ma lauded the students for showing their concern for the country through a sit-in protest and invited them to negotiate the issue this week.

“Democracy is something we need to learn. People should respect one another’s freedom, otherwise democracy will be compromised,” Ma said yesterday during an interview with M-Radio Station in Taichung City.

ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY MO YAN-CHIH
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2008/11/16/2003428751

[Taipei Times] Wild Strawberries call for probes

YOUTH GONE WILD: The demonstrators asked the government which article authorizes the police to stop people from waving Taiwan’s flag, but not China’s flag
By Flora Wang

Friday, Nov 14, 2008, Page 4

Students yesterday perform a skit during a sit-in protest at the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall, demanding that the government amend the Assembly and Parade Law.

In an on-line statement on the students’ Web blog (action1106.blogspot.com) yesterday, the students urged the government to explain to the public specifically which law authorized the police to prevent people from waving Taiwan’s national flag, but allowed people to hold China’s national flag during demonstrations for and against the visit by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) last week.

The students also urged the government to clarify to the public whether all police officers involved in the security measures last week carried out their duties in accordance with normal administrative procedures and urged the authorities to reflect on whether their measures had been excessive.

The students have been staging silent sit-ins nationwide, protesting what they call excessive police force during Chen’s five-day stay.

They are demanding an apology from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) and the resignation of National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞) and National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明).

Also on the students’ agenda is an immediate amendment to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法), which currently obliges event organizers to gain police approval before holding rallies.

On their Web blog, the students have included numerous hyperlinks to video clips showing police security measures last week, including one that showed a plainclothes police officer telling a person videotaping the protest at Zhongshan Bridge to immediately leave “or I will ask a member of the Special Weapons And Tactics [SWAT] team to arrest you.”

“We can see that the law enforcement authorities assigned police officers a mission to complete and that police officers would rather excessively limit or even violate people’s basic human rights in a bid to save their own jobs,” the student protesters’ statement said, adding that the police had violated people’s constitutional rights by resorting to force against those who did not pose an obvious and immediate threat to Chen.

The students also shrugged off Ma’s comments on Wednesday that excessive use of police force had only occurred in isolated cases.

“These illegal and unconstitutional incidents and violations of human rights took place because the government expanded the scale of law enforcement during Chen’s stay in Taiwan,” student movement spokesman Lee Li-wei (李立偉) said.

Meanwhile, Lee called on teachers and students who supported the movement to gather and broaden the scale of the sit-in at Liberty Square, outside the Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall tomorrow.

Lee said about 50 students from Hong Kong Polytechnic University would launch a sit-in at their school in support of the movement today.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/14/2003428559

[Taipei Times] Sit-in: A lesson in preserving democracy

By Lin Huan-yi 林奐怡

Wednesday, Nov 12, 2008, Page 8

When I searched for Songs of Taiwan (台灣之歌) on YouTube recently, I was stunned by what I saw. I could hardly believe that what I found was really the Taiwan I know. I support communication between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, but when the national dignity and freedom of speech that we are so proud of are trampled like this, how can one not feel pain? I was moved to voice my discontent with the government.

I learned about the “Operation Seige” protest against Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) from the newspapers. Despite the chance that I would be labeled a supporter of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) if I joined the protest, I still went.

However, once there all I heard and saw was nationalistic shouting and confrontations, with demonstrators egged on by politicians delivering sensational and theatrical speeches. This did not reflect why I was participating. I am unwilling to downgrade myself and become a tool in the hands of politicians. Besides, I felt that the protests were not aimed at achieving social justice as I had expected, so I quietly left and went home.

After I got home, I went online and learned that a sit-in petition organized by Lee Ming-tsung (李明璁), an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at National Taiwan University, had already attracted much attention on PTT2, which is one of Taiwan’s biggest bulletin board systems. After reading the posts carefully, I felt that the protest dovetailed with my pursuit of social justice and resolved to join the sit-in.

Later in the evening on Friday, protesters were expelled from the site of the sit-in near the Legislative Yuan. Hundreds of teachers and students, including myself, were bundled into police vans and dropped off at different locations around town. However, it was not long before we made our way back downtown and gathered again, this time at the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall.

This is a living lesson in democracy. I talked to a teacher who said that democracy does not appear by itself and is often a result of street movements. Sadly, the democracy that results from such street movements is often destroyed by those in power. The concept of civil disobedience did not appear in my school textbooks, but I have now learned about it firsthand. I have also witnessed how the media sensationalize and distort simple appeals for human rights.

The pursuit of social justice must go beyond political camps. Take my schoolmate, for example: She took part in the “red shirt” campaign against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), but she is also participating in the sit-in protest this time. To which camp or party does she belong, then?

Unfortunately, Taiwan is still trapped in a blue-green dichotomy. Why should students be labeled as one or the other when expressing discontent with the government? Does this also mean students are deprived of their right to discuss public issues? This is ridiculously unfair and should never happen.

On Saturday, I sat in the rain all day under the cover of a wide-brimmed farmer’s hat. Despite the miserable weather, I felt fortunate to participate in the student movement and I am certainly proud of the teachers and students who sat in the rain with me. We are safeguarding the universal values of human rights and democracy through a peaceful and rational process.



Lin Huan-yi is a student in the Department of Graphic Arts Communication at National Taiwan Normal University.

TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2008/11/12/2003428379

[Taipei Times] Students reconvene, protest on

ROUND TWO: Although demonstrators were evicted on Friday, many returned to continue their sit-in, demanding an apology for how police handled last week’s protests
By Lin Chia-chi
STAFF REPORTER, WITH STAFF WRITER
Sunday, Nov 09, 2008, Page 1

A protester winces as rain beats down on him at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall in downtown Taipei yesterday. Hundreds of college students have taken part in a sit-in protest against heavy-handed policing of recent demonstrations.
PHOTO: LO PEI-DER, TAIPEI TIMES
“We want human rights!” chanted students at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall as they continued their sit-in for a third day, demanding an apology from the government over what they called the “rough” tactics used by police to deal with protesters during the visit by China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chaiman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) last week.

Despite the poor weather yesterday, more than 100 students wore simple raincoats and remained sitting in protest in the Taipei rain. (More)

The Age of Enlightenment

In a public poll on November 10th, by TVBS, which can be found on the English KMT website and seems to provide the numbers for KMT think tanks strategies, it is stated:

10. Do you support the protest sit-in being held by university students at Liberty Square at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall?

Support 38%
Do not support 50%
No opinion 11%

So far so good. But what is really worrying are the answers to the following question:

11. Do you know the purpose of the students in this protest sit-in?

Yes 63%
No 37%

Three days after the protest and at a time it was already reported in the media, a day before a man burned himself on liberty square 37% of the Taiwanese did not know the purpose of the protests.

What are the reasons?
One reason might be the media strategy which is mainly based on modern forms of communication that do not reach older or less educated people, like it is possible with printed newspapers that explaining the reasons and goals of the protests and can easily be distributed for example by trade union members in factories or in public transportation.

Another reason might be that the age of enlightenment, which made up the way for the foundation of the United States or the French revolution never really reached Taiwan. People do not think on their own, they are controlled, they want to be controlled.


What is enlightenment? This question was answered in 1784 by Immanuel Kant (in English translation):

Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one’s understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! “Have courage to use your own understanding!” — that is the motto of enlightenment. (more)

Mail Art Project – Mobilize Taiwan

Call for International Entries:

Mail Art Project – Mobilize Taiwan

This project is initiated in response to the Wild Berries Student Movement that started on November 6, 2008.

For additional information please refer to http://taiwanstudentmovement2008.blogspot.com/

We Need Your Support!
Voice your concern for the future of political freedom of the youth in Taiwan.
Letters, art objects, designs, musical composition and video works are welcomed.

E-mail your messages to:
mobilizetw@gmail.com

Entries with good intention will be displayed in front of Freedom Square in Taipei City.

Be Creative
Be Sincere
Be Constructive
Be Concerned

For Freedom
For Justice
For Peace
For Basic Human Rights


◘ The Mail Art – the Mobilize Taiwan Initiative 2008

Democracy NOW

http://www.democracynow.org/

Hopefully the will have a very close look on Taiwan in near future.

Taipei Poetry Festival

is the next big chance to protest with an international audience. Persuade the artists to support the protest in Taiwan. They will listen:

http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=788954&lang=eng_news&cate_img=logo_taiwan&cate_rss=TAIWAN_eng

Taiwanese students to continue protest during weekend

http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=788996&lang=eng_news&cate_img=49.jpg&cate_rss=news_Society_TAIWAN

[China Post] Students to expand sit-in protest today

Updated Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:20 am TWN, CNA

TAIPEI, Taiwan -- The organizers of a recently established student movement pushing for reform of Taiwan’s assembly law announced yesterday their plan to expand their ongoing sit-in protest.

According to Lin Yu-hsuan, spokesman for the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement, the sit-in, which has been held at Taipei’s Liberty Square since last Friday, will be expanded on Saturday and is expected to draw approximately 1,000 participants, including student representatives from Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.

The sit-in once saw around 500 students participate, but the number has dropped to below 100 over the past few days as many returned to school to sit for midterm exams.

Lin said the group does not rule out the possibility that politicians sympathizing with their cause may be invited to take part. They have previously banned non students from participating.

Lin said the group will continue their peaceful demonstration until their appeals are answered, with disregard for possible dispersal by the police.

Over the past week, the group of students has been staging the sit-in to protest against what they called the use of excessive force by police to disperse pro-independence demonstrators who protested against the recent visit to Taiwan by a Chinese envoy.

The envoy, Chen Yunlin, president of the Beijing-based Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, is China’s top negotiator with Taiwan. He was in the country from Nov. 3-7 to sign four non-political pacts with his Taiwan counterpart Chiang Pin-kung, chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation.

Some protesters, who feared the visit and agreements would jeopardize Taiwan’s independence and sovereignty, threw bottles and rocks at police and pushed down police barricades. Police responded by spraying water at the protesters, scuffling with some of them, and arresting others.

In addition to demanding an open apology from President Ma Ying-jeou and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan, the student group is also asking for the replacement of National Security Bureau Director General Tsai Chao-ming and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun.

Furthermore, the students want the Parade and Assembly Law be amended to relax its restrictions on people’s right to demonstrate. Protesters had complained their application to protest in many areas were rejected. Ma said in a radio interview Wednesday that Minister of the Interior Liao Liou-yi has on many occasions apologized over the alleged misconduct by law-enforcement officers and promised to review the methods adopted by the police in performing their duties.

Ma admitted there was room for improvement in the performance of Tsai and Wang in handling the demonstrations, but said “this was not to an extent where they should be removed from their posts.”

The president said the legislative caucus of the ruling Kuomintang will hold a public hearing to discuss a possible amendment to the Parade and Assembly law, with representatives of the protesting students to be invited to express their opinions at the hearing.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/2008/11/15/183266/Students-to.htm

[Taipei Times] Strawberries returning to sit-in protest

GROWING: A spokesman for the student movement said that the sit-in protest was expected to draw about 1,000 participants from around the nation today

STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Saturday, Nov 15, 2008, Page 4

The organizers of a recently established student movement pushing for reform of the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) announced yesterday a plan to expand the sit-in protest.

Lin Yu-hsuan (林邑軒), spokesman for the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement, said the week-long sit-in at Taipei’s Liberty Square would be expanded today and was expected to draw approximately 1,000 participants, including student representatives from Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.

The sit-in earlier saw around 500 students participate, but the number has dropped to below 100 over the past few days as many returned to school for mid-term exams.

Lin said the group did not rule out the possibility that politicians sympathizing with their cause may be invited to take part. They had previously banned non-students from participating.

Lin said the group would continue their peaceful demonstration until their appeals were answered, disregarding possible dispersal by the police.

Over the past week, the group of students has been staging the sit-in to protest what they called the use of excessive force by police to disperse pro-independence demonstrators during a recent visit to Taiwan by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林).

In addition to demanding an apology from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄), the student group is also asking for the resignations of National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明) and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞).

The students also want the assembly law to be amended to relax its restrictions on people’s right to demonstrate. Protesters had complained that their applications to protest were rejected in many areas.

In a radio interview on Wednesday, Ma said there was room for improvement in Tsai and Wang’s performance in handling the demonstrations, but added: “This was not to the extent that they should be removed from their posts.”

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/15/2003428655

[Rationale] Why President Ma and Premier Liu Should Issue an Apology

The first appeal made by the Wild Strawberries Movement is for President Ma and Premier Liu to take responsibility and apologize for the blatant civil rights infringement during the ARATS Chairman (Chen Yun Lin) visit. What is the basis for such demand?

While we whole-heartedly agree that the government must provide adequate protective detail to ensure Mr. Chen's safety, especially given the alleged attack of ARATS Vice Chairman Zhang Mingqing during his visit. However, we also firmly believe that law enforcement tactics extended beyond protective details. Not only have these extreme security measures threatened Taiwanese citizens' civil rights, upset the balance of law and order, but more importantly, endangered our democratic nation. Simply put, a government must answer to the highest law of our land, the Constitution.

Let us evaluate the so called "security measures" over the past few days: (1) clearing and monitoring all major highways; (2) banning any public displays of our national flag; (3) censoring citizens who proclaim "Taiwan is not a part of China"; (4) confiscating private properties including flags and display signs, and (5) the continued inability of Secretary Minister Hsueh Hsiang-Chuan to explain the reasoning behind forcibly shutting down a privately owned business, Sunrise Record Store. The aforementioned activities clearly demonstrate the oppression of freedom of speech in an effort to welcome Mr. Chen, posing a severe threat to our constitution and our hard-earned freedom and democracy. While we recognize the importance of ensuring the safety of any foreign dignitaries visiting Taiwan, we challenge the notion that everyday citizens with digital video camcorders filming Mr. Chen's motorcade would endanger his safety. Moreover, we question the danger of waving our national flag in public areas. The heightened and over-reactive security measures throughout Mr. Chen's visit illustrated a government, designed to protect and guarantee its citizens' fundamental human rights, became an oppressive entity which deprived its citizens of life, liberty and property and disregarded the right to assemble. By sacrificing the diversity and freedom of speech in our multidimensional society, we have paid the hefty price of undermining Taiwan's democratic constitutional government.

Even prior to Mr. Chen's visit, there were signs that Taiwanese people was not unanimous in welcoming such a visit, not to mention lingering doubts regarding an earlier meeting between SEF Chairman Chiang and Mr. Chen. We question the government's reluctance to allow dissenting voices practice their freedom of speech and more importantly, the censorship of such dissenting voices. If the Taiwanese government had allowed its diverse citizens to freely express their opinions through legal and already established means, we believe violent clashes and civil rights violations would not have occurred.

If the President decides to view the aforementioned examples of power abuse as separate and unrelated incidents, he would be ignoring a systemic and prevalent issue that exists within our system. Inevitably, this would lead to a gradual dissipation of freedom and democracy in Taiwan, and an end to the established law and order. As such, we believe that the President and Premier, who are tasked with protecting our constitutional rights, should be held responsible.

Since its inception over a week ago, the Wild Strawberries Movement has not received any direct reply from the government. During an interview with a television network, President Ma indicated that police brutality was an isolated incident and does not plan to issue a formal apology to the people of Taiwan. Moreover, Premier Liu stated in another interview that “the Wild Strawberries Movement does not represent majority opinion in Taiwan."

However, we believe the fact that the restriction of freedom and excessive law enforcement tactics were systematic, clearly organized, and concentrated in certain areas illustrate these measurements of control were not accidental and certainly should not be viewed as isolated incidents. Moreover, the statement that The Wild Strawberries Movement is not representative of majority opinion fails to address the legality of the government’s recent actions. We deeply regret Premier Liu’s refusal to address the civil rights violations and the power abuse considering that a government’s legitimacy should not be solely based on “majority opinion” and that dissenting voices, however debatedly minority voices, must also be heard. Once again, Premier Liu’s response has shown the government’s blatant disregard for freedom of speech.

We sincerely hope that the government can properly evaluate the constitutionality of its actions during Mr. Chen's visit and respond to our appeals directly. Our memories of President Ma (as a President-Elect in April of this year) promising to the now deceased human rights activist Po Yang that he will be dedicated to the preservation and protection of human rights remains fresh. "Human Rights as a Cornerstone of Nation-Building" should not be a mere slogan, and we are optimistic that President Ma and Premier Liu will have the courage and wisdom to respond directly to the appeals of the sit-in students.

Strawberries on Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Strawberry_student_movement
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/野草莓運動

NTDTV from New York about the protests and protest statements

http://english.ntdtv.com/?c=151&a=5914

Wer schweigt macht sich mitschuldig!

'The quiet is guilty too' , in a roughly translation of a German quote, reflecting the experience of two dictatorships in the 20th Century in Germany.
The one who is not speaking against the criminal is participating in the criminal himself.

Why don’t we hear the voice of the people who participated in the wild lily movement?
Why don’t we see them speaking in the parliaments, writing in the newspapers?
Don’t they care or are they afraid?
Is Taiwan a country were people have to be afraid to speak free?

What about the ones that participated in the Protests in 1989 in Beijing, escaped to Taiwan and survived the Tian’Anmeng massacre? Have thy forgotten their past? Did they sell their soul?

What about the ones that roughly know that there is a protest? The ones that do not care, the ones that do not read the newspapers, the people who go to university or work everyday as if nothing happened.
Shouldn’t we tell them that democracy needs responsibility, requires that people care?
Shouldn’t the protest be brought into the universities and into the offices and even into the shopping malls?

Things, would be different in the motherland of revolution were many ideas about modern democracy of freedom and human rights started (as in the US of course):

If Taiwan would be France, the Universities would be closed and all the students and professors would protest together as long as it is necessary and the statements would be sprayed on the University buildings!

If Taiwan would be France, the protest would be in the centre of the cities, between shopping malls and restaurants, so that everybody could see and hear.

If Taiwan would be France, the traffic would break down and no train would leave and no highway would be unblocked.

If Taiwan would be France, no student would protest silent, and feared being pushed around or ignored by a Government.

It is time to storm the Bastille! Vive la revolution!


And to block typical argument of Taiwanese politicians against any kind of protest: How important the economic development and the peace in the society is and that people should work together and be modest, … (to cut a long story short: Shut up and work or study harder!)

France is a much richer and more free country than Taiwan. As all western democracies are!
So forget about these stupid arguments!

[Mobilization] Nov 15th Come to join in series of movements on Liberty Square

The movement will gather students from six spots of the sit-in movement on 15th November at Liberty Square, Taipei.
To those who support the movement, we wish you to come and also invite your friends to come as well.
Since the initiation of this sit-in movement, it have been more than a week. This Saturday, please come to Liberty Square being with the students and show your support!


TIME Content
--------------------------------------------------
0900 ~ 1200 Student representatives from six spots gather together sit-in
--------------------------------------------------
1200 ~ 1300 Lunch Break
--------------------------------------------------
1300 ~ 1400 NGOs gather to support students' demands
1400 ~ 1500 Action drama by Professors
1500 ~ 1530 Press Conference and the opening ceremony of the gathering movement
1530 ~ 1600 Action drama for Wild StrawBerries and human rigths
1600 ~ 1700 Sit-in
1700 ~ 1900 Talks and prospect of the movement
--------------------------------------------------
1900 ~ 1930 Dinner Break
--------------------------------------------------
1930 ~ 2100 Forum on human rights
2100 ~ 2200 Voice of Strawberries: The reflection of sit-in students

See you there!

[Rationale] Why the National Security Bureau Director and National Police Agency Director-General Must Take Responsibility - A Tribute to the Police

Since the 6th of November 2008, students and professors across the nation joined an unplanned sit-in demonstration. The catalyst for this unplanned sit-in was the blatant excessive law enforcement tactics during the Chinese envoy visit which clearly threatened the basic rights of Taiwanese citizens. Later that evening, we were saddened by the news that the Democratic Progressive Party’s “Siege” protest activities resulted in violent clashes. Regardless of acts committed by law enforcement or the protesters, we do not believe that violence is the answer. Since the inception of the Wild Strawberries Movement, we have always maintained a peaceful, rational, and non-violent manner. On the 7th of November 2008, law enforcement officers surrounded us and dragged every single student and professor at this peaceful sit-in onto a police transport. Many students observed the reluctance (and at times tearful) displayed by police officers. As we relocated to Liberty Square with the intention to stage a long-term sit-in, we are grateful for these officers for allowing and assisting us to continue this sit-in peacefully. That said, it remains our duty to condemn and reject any illegal acts of violence, whether it be committed by the police or citizens.

Some have questioned us since "Police is only doing their job, why the continuing condemnation?", thus the Wild Strawberries participants would like to take this opportunity to pay tributes and a heart felt thanks to our hardworking front line police. If it weren't for them, it would be quite impossible to have a stable, peaceful life. However with acknowledging the above, we still demonstrated, we insisted to protest in the Liberty Square. Why is that so?

Because we are confused. Confused about during Chen's visit, police have hurt the ones they should be protecting. We're confused by police's action when Chen Yu-Ching(陳育青) was recording the Chinese envoy with his own personal video recorder; He was questioned upon by the police, and even brought back to the police station against his will, his personal freedom was restrained until the arrival of a local representative. We're confused when a record store playing a piece of music would induce the police to ban it from playing, even led to involuntarily closure of the shop. We're confused because when a guest have arrived, people having different expectations and reactions are only natural to a democratic society; however what would force the police to confiscate the national flag or even Tibetan flag and hording members of the public, restricting their speech and freewill? What kind of policies were involved, to disrupt the harmony which existed between police and ordinary citizen by carrying out orders which clearly violated human rights, subsequently the public were left feeling defeated, jaded with a sense of angst. We are confused, what kind of policy, led to such grotesque outcome?

Wild Strawberries are deeply grateful for our police, they've endured unimaginable pressure for up keeping the order of our society. At the same time to continue and strengthen our foundation as a democratic country, we insists the responsibility of violating human rights due to abusive police power under active investigation. During Chen's visit, undeniably government is to protect the guest's safety with a thorough and sound security measure in place, however a benevolent and capable government should not disregard "basic rights" of it's citizens when carrying out policies. Therefore, we will hold the decision makers of the highest level responsible, at the same time acknowledging the amount of hard-work our police endured while carrying out their duty. The Chief of National Police Agency in charge of organising police, while Director General of National Security Bureau manages guests' safety. Together they planned and managed the police, policies in handling situations and limits of law enforcement. Due to the fact that during the period of Chen's visit, there were numerous accounts of violation of human rights, therefore we do not see ways to treat these events as matter of contingency and thus shifting the responsibilities onto the front line police. Our postulation being that the violation occurred due to government's overall inappropriate planning, and was poorly executed. Hence Wild Strawberries insists the head of both National Security Bureau and National Police Agency to take the responsibility of the violations and step down to revive public trust in police.

Wild Strawberries believe that we should pay our tribute to our police forces, for their untiring service to the nation, from everyday upkeep to enforcement of order during special occasions. At the same time, we strongly protest the police's obvious abuse of their power, since no policy formulation should involve violating human rights. The human rights violations which happened during Chen's visit should not be treated as a random accidental event. We would like to point out the violations which happened were due to absurd planning of the overall security measures. In a mature democratic society, any unreasonable violence should be condemned, at the same time government forces who hold the power given by the people would be wise to consider policies discreetly to avoid restraining citizens' basic rights. The Taiwanese democracy did not fell from the sky, thus we insist the heads of National Police Agency and National Security bureau must resign and apologise for their inaptness.

[Wanted] Observation/ News/ Feedback/ Support (in English)

It have been a week since the sit-in movement was launched. And the English blog is built with all your contribution, on spreading, reading, and writing. In every case, we need more articles in English here!!
What we are looking for:
1. I noticed that there are some articles in the individual blog which is written in English regards to this movement. I would like to gather some here.
2. You may want to translate any news from the world media, like German, French, Spanish, Japanese, Korean... into English.
3. Your observation and feedback on any news, phenomena during this movement.
4. Illustration on Human Rights in the recent World (i.e., cases from other countries) and in the history

To communicate and spread the idea, we need your participation. If you wish to support this blog, please send articles in English to taiwanstudentmovement2008@gmail.com .

The formant:
1. The summary (Brief and Concise)
2. The link to the original article (on blog, news...)
3. Your identity (and in which name you would like to be posted, or anonymous.)

Thanks for your attribution towards the blog, the movement, the development of democracy and the protection of human rights in Taiwan!

Ma: Two Officials Must Reflect, Not Step Down

By Wang Yu Chung, Peng Hsien Jun, Huang Duen Yien

Published: 11/13/2008 The Liberty Times

President Ma Ying-jeou responded officially for the first time yesterday to the Wild Strawberry Movement's demand that the National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun and National Security Bureau Director Tsai Chao-ming step down. Ma said that their actions warrant an evaluation, but "do not warrant dismissals."

As for the students’ demand that President Ma and Premier Liu apologize for excessive law enforcement tactics used during the Chinese envoy’s visit, Ma pointed out that one must look at the larger picture. The agreements signed between the two sides and the atmosphere created laid the foundation for improved cross-straight relations and will be beneficial to Taiwan's international standing.

Ma indicated that police enforcement may have caused some unintentional injuries, citing a TV reporter’s case as an example. Minister of Interior Liao Liou-yi has apologized on several occasions and will assess law enforcement tactics. That said, recent police activities in maintaining public safety should be considered as a success.

The National Police Agency mentioned that accusations made by the Wild Strawberries Movement were turned over to the Taipei City Police Department Bureau for further investigation.

With regard to the student’s appeal to amend the Parade and Assembly Law from its current approval and permission requirement to allowing citizens to simply inform authorities of assembly plans is consistent with his position. He appreciates the students’ assistance in helping him realize his campaign promises.

However, Ma pointed out that recent polls indicated that there are varying opinions on amending the legislation as a result of the violence and bloody scenes from the November 6^th rally. Changing the system does not imply that individuals may simply call the police immediately before staging demonstrations. For instance, Germany allows its citizens to inform authorities of demonstration plans ahead of time, but law enforcement reserves the right to reject such plans. Ma emphasized that a permit system may not necessarily be restrictive, while system of informing authorities may not be lax. The key issue is not about whether to inform authorities, but about violent activities.

Kuomintang’s Central Standing Committee also discussed revising the legislation. Party Chairman Wu Po-hsiung specifically called on the Democratic Progressive Party to dissociate itself with corruption and violence.

Furthermore, some KMT Central Standing Committee members proposed a visit to Liu Po-yen, a self-professed old KMT member who committed self-immolation two days ago. The KMT stated that Liu did not register in 2000 and is no longer a party member. He has switched political alignment [from pro-Blue to pro-Green] and has been consuming more DPP-friendly media content, making an official visit from the KMT unnecessary.

Translated from http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/nov/13/today-p2.htm

[SCMP] Ties that blind--Improved cross-strait relations appear to have come at a cost to some civil liberties in Taiwan

Jerome Cohen (Former Supervisor of President Ma)
Updated on Nov 13, 2008

Last week's historic visit to Taiwan by Beijing's cross-strait chief, Chen Yunlin , which culminated in four useful agreements, focused attention on issues of human rights as well as politics. Some issues concerned the proper government response to public protests in a free society. Others involved fair investigation of former and present government leaders suspected of corruption.

Chinese have recognised the importance of protecting foreign envoys for almost 3,000 years. The feudal states that contended for power before establishment of the Qin dynasty reciprocally assured the personal safety of their emissaries. Such protection has continued to be indispensable to inter-state co-operation.

After police in Tainan failed to prevent an assault on Mr Chen's deputy, president Ma Ying-jeou's government was obligated to do better during Mr Chen's visit. Although police could not prevent Mr Chen from being trapped in a hotel for eight hours by a huge mob of protesters, they did defend him against bodily harm throughout a stressful week.

In doing so, they went beyond the limits of a free society, forbidding peaceful protesters from displaying Taiwanese and Tibetan flags, confiscating flags from demonstrators, closing a store that played Taiwanese songs and seeking to minimise the visitors' awareness of the protests. There were also incidents of police brutality, albeit sometimes in response to violent provocations by demonstrators.

The police misconduct even outraged many local supporters of Mr Chen's visit. Mr Ma, in addition to implementing his campaign pledge to sponsor revision of the Assembly and Parade Law to eliminate protesters' need for advance official permission, should recommend amendments prohibiting the kind of undemocratic police practices that recently occurred and order training designed to enhance police compliance with the law. It is encouraging to note that Democratic Progressive Party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen, who led the massive opposition demonstration, has subsequently called not only for a government review of police misconduct but also for a re-examination by her own party of its failures to maintain order among its demonstrators. The DPP, if it is to fulfil its essential role as democratic opposition, must not degenerate into an army of street fighters.

Some Taiwanese and foreign critics took the occasion of Mr Chen's visit to call attention to another crucial feature of democratic government - the fair prosecution of current and former officials suspected of corruption. The critics voiced three serious complaints about recent arrests and incommunicado detentions of prominent DPP figures who have served as government officials. They imply that the DPP is being singled out for prosecutions while corruption among Kuomintang leaders is being ignored. They also claim that: most DPP suspects have been held incommunicado without a court examination of the justification for their detentions; and that prosecutors' offices have been leaking detrimental information about the suspects to the media while denying them knowledge of the leaks and a chance to refute the "trial by press".

These practices, it is said, bring into question the political neutrality of the judiciary, and the presumption of innocence and other elements of due process required for the fair and open trials essential to democracy, raising the spectre of the unjust procedures of "the dark days of martial law" (1947-1987). It is not clear whether critics' claims of "selective prosecution" are well founded. Recent arrests may simply reflect massive corruption by the DPP, which dominated executive government for the past eight years - corruption that allegedly reached as high as former president Chen Shui-bian and his family.

Oddly, although during the Chen administration some prosecutions were brought against both DPP and KMT figures, some obvious KMT targets were overlooked despite reportedly thick dossiers compiled by Control Yuan investigators. Mr Ma should appoint a commission of impartial experts to review such prosecutions.

It does not appear that any of the recently detained DPP figures were denied a court hearing or their right to counsel. Moreover, there is a legislative basis for the courts' decisions to detain them incommunicado for up to four months of investigation if there is a reasonable basis for believing that the suspects might otherwise falsify evidence. Yet, in view of the harshness of this pre-indictment sanction and the obstacles it creates to mounting an adequate defence, it ought to be invoked rarely.

Certainly, the Legislative Yuan, or the commission suggested here, should re-examine legislation to strike a new balance between the threat of corruption to a democratic government and the threat of incommunicado detention to civil liberty.

The charge of biased prosecution leaks to the press seems to be the most straightforward of the critics' complaints. Such leaks, which occur in many countries, do appear to have taken place and cannot be allowed in a democratic system.

Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of NYU's US-Asia Law Institute and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations

http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=4f2a6ac45d09d110VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=China&s=News