Depuis la visite du 3 Novembre du représentant chinois de l’Association pour les relations entre les deux rives du Détroit de Taïwan (ARATS) afin de signer divers contrats avec le gouvernement taïwanais, les agents de police ont commis de nombreux actes abusifs envers des opposants pacifiques de différents groupes, sous le prétexte du « maintien de l’ordre ». Ces actes comprennent fouilles et interdictions arbitraires, confiscations et destructions de biens, attaques physiques, dispersion de rassemblements et même arrestations et détentions. La grande majorité des victimes de cette brutalité policière n’étaient même pas dans les environs du président de l’ARATS, Mr Chen Yu Lin, et s’étaient simplement trouvés être, passer ou photographier divers endroits quand ils ont été pris à parti.
D’après la couverture médiatique, nous nous sommes rendu compte de la gravité de la situation. Il ne s’agit plus d’une question technique de l’application de la loi, ou encore d’un différend entre les partisans de divers partis politiques. Ceci est la généralisation de la violence étatique, qui provoque et attaque la société civile. Tous ces actes d’oppression, qui ignorent les Droits de l’Homme et les valeurs démocratiques, rappellent l’époque de la loi martiale. A tel point que même des députés de la majorité ont exprimé leur inquiétude à ce sujet au Yuan exécutif (gouvernement), cependant que Mr Liu (premier ministre) a esquivé toutes responsabilités avec des excuses des plus minces. Nous sommes choqués et outrés de cette réponse, tout autant que consternés et humiliés.
Nous devons alors nous demander : est-ce que l’augmentation des échanges entre les rives du Détroit nécessitent que Taiwan doive rabaisser sa conception de la liberté et de la démocratie, jusqu'à atteindre le niveau du pouvoir répressif et autoritaire chinois ?
En quelques jours seulement, la démocratie libérale pour laquelle Taïwan a durement lutté, s’est pratiquement effondrée au travers de la présence policière massive en ville, et de l’atmosphère de peur et de répression qu’elle implique. Derrière ses barricades policières, le gouvernement reste aveuglé par l’illusion de cette « rencontre historique » et se fourvoie en réceptions et autres banquets. Pendant ce temps, les droits des citoyens concernant la liberté d’expression et la liberté de mouvement, pourtant garantis constitutionnellement, sont mis de côté et même oubliés.
Comme la plupart de leurs actions ne sont pas constitutionnelles, il n’est pas surprenant qu’il n’y ait pas eu un seul policier capable de définir clairement face à la caméra quelle loi les habilite à suivre les ordres de leurs supérieurs. Les agents de police sont supposés être chargés de la protection de la population. Mais à cause d’ordres venant de leur hiérarchie, ils se sont transformés en gangsters qui réprimandent et empêche le peuple d’exprimer son opinion. Nous n’avons pas l’intention de blâmer individuellement les policiers qui ne peuvent qu’obéir aux ordres de leurs supérieurs. En revanche, nous demandons solennellement aux hautes autorités du gouvernement d’assumer leur part de responsabilité pour ces abus.
Nous sommes un simple groupe de professeurs, étudiants, animateurs culturels et citoyens qui est concerné par l’état de désordre actuel de Taïwan et son développement futur.
Le 6 Novembre, à 11H, sans aucune aide ou mobilisation d’un quelconque parti politique ou groupe civique, nous nous réunirons devant la porte du Yuan exécutif (gouvernement) vêtus de noir et de masques afin de signifier notre désaccord profond, et nous nous tiendrons la main jusqu’à ce que nos revendications aboutissent. Nos revendications sont les suivantes :
1) Le président Ma Ying-Jeou et le premier ministre Liu Chao-Shiuan doivent s’excuser publiquement auprès de tous les citoyens.
2) Le directeur général de l’Agence Nationale de Police Wang Cho-Chiun et le directeur du Bureau National de la Sécurité doivent démissionner
3) Le Yuan législatif (assemblée) doit revoir rapidement la loi sur les manifestations et rassemblements qui actuellement restreint les droits du peuple.
24 Nov 2008
23 Nov 2008
Taiwan DPP leader apologizes for not amending assembly and parade law
Taipei, Nov. 23 (CNA) Opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen visited a group of student demonstrators at Liberty Square in Taipei Sunday and apologized for the DPP's failure to amend the Assembly and Parade Law during its eight years as the ruling party. (more)
Bill Creata 5 Minute Podcast News, Politics and current events with real life commentary
There is a Podcast on our movement!! Thanks to Bill!!
Wild Strawberries Update
http://billcreata.podomatic.com/
Wild Strawberries Update
http://billcreata.podomatic.com/
Documentary of Mr. Cheng Nan-jung
Activity at Chia-yi : Documentary of Cheng Nan-jung
When: 2008-11-23 7:30p.m.
When: 2008-11-23 7:30p.m.
Where: Chia-yi 228 Park
You are invited to come to care, to share, to discuss!
More information about Cheng Nan-jung(1947~1989): wiki page, Deng Liberty Foundation(A foundation named after Cheng, for promoting freedom and memorizing Cheng's thought and spirits.)
A video clip with music and photo for your reference:
Introduction to Mr. Cheng Nan-jung and the foundation
In March 1984, he founded Freedom Era Weekly, and declared that "[it was] fighting for 100 percent freedom of speech." Cheng Nan-jung had registered 18 different magazine licenses, as "spare tires" for use when the KMT banned the magazine and suspended publication. He said "I'm not scared of arrest nor of being killed, basically, I'll fight them to the very end."
***
In 1989, Cheng was charged with insurrection for printing a new Constitution for the Republic of Taiwan. An arrest warrant was issued. He refused to appear in court. When the police arrived to arrest him on April 7, he committed suicide by self-immolation. He set fire to the building and died in the blaze. His immolation protest against the Kuomintang was covered by Formosa TV.
Military personnel on campus in Taiwan
In Taiwanese universities and high schools, there is a group of personnel you would never find in democratic countries: military training instructors. In the old days, they were responsible for talking students into joining the KMT, policing students’ appearance (length/colour of hair, nails or skirts/trousers; whether one had their shirt tucked in and shoes shined) along with students’ thoughts on the government, reporting those who were not loyal to the party and the leader’ and giving basic military training to students on the side. (more)
22 Nov 2008
Taiwan's police admit hitting Chou at protest
Police admitted beating an opposition member of the Taipei City Council during an anti-Chinese protest, while students invited President Ma Ying-jeou yesterday to attend a mock human rights funeral.(more)
[FIDH] [Press Release] Open letter to President Ma, Premier Liu, and R.O.C.--Taiwan
Deep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN Yunlin
20/11/2008
Taiwan
Open letter to
* President Ma Ying-jeou
* Premier Liu Chao-hsuan
* Republic of China – Taiwan
Your Excellencies,
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is writing to you to express its deep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN Yunlin. FIDH believes that such arrests and violence are grave violations of human rights, under the pretext of national security.
According to the information received, since November 3rd, 2008, the city of Taipei has been heavily occupied by more than 7,000 police officers. The authorities have taken many drastic measures, including: confiscating and damaging private property, harassing and assaulting people who came too close to undefined or vaguely defined areas, clearing communal highway lanes with force, conducting random searches and arrests, and restricting the freedom of movement of citizens. These actions have been taken during Mr. CHEN’s visit, in the name of protecting security.
However, we fear these aggressions in fact aim at suppressing the right to freedom of expression of citizens. To supplement this violence, there are also unprecedented restrictions which clearly overpass the limits of ensuring security. For example, citizens have been restricted from displaying or carrying the national flag of Taiwan, forbidden to declare that “Taiwan is not part of China”, forbidden from carrying filming devices, and restricted from playing any music the authorities consider inappropriate.
These measures seem to be aimed at silencing political opinions rather than protecting security, and thus they blatantly violate the Constitution of Taiwan, notably Articles 11 and 14 which protect freedom of expression and international human rights standards. Consequently, FIDH requests that the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, bound by the Constitution and the national legislation, should be held responsible for violating their legal obligations. The Judicial Yuan and Control Yuan should immediately conduct independent and impartial investigations into all allegations of human rights violations and hold all personnel in office accountable for neglecting their civil and legal obligations, in line with the Judicial Yuan’s recent statement that “it is very important to form an objective and solid review standard, and make the constitutional reviews more predictable and trust-worthy to people”. Those who perpetrated these violations, particularly in the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, must be held accountable, in accordance with Article 24 of the Constitution of Taiwan, which stipulates that “Any public employee who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall, in addition to being subject to disciplinary punishment in accordance with law, be liable to criminal and civil action. The victim may, in accordance with law, claim damages from the State for any injury sustained therefrom.”
More generally, FIDH calls upon the government to amend the Parade and Assembly Law, in particular : to abolish the requirement for mandatory permits and adopt the system of voluntary basis and the clause on special area of restriction, which gives too much discretion to the authority to restrict people’s freedom of association and freedom of expression. In addition the authorities should abolish the order to dismiss as well as the provisions on special criminal punishment, which is a legacy of the martial law era. Finally, Taiwan should establish the protocol for law enforcement personnel who should have the obligation to clearly announce his or her identity when on duty, to ensure legitimacy and accountability.
Your Excellencies,
Our Organization firmly believes that the fruit of Taiwan’s remarkable democratization has landmark significance to the Asian continent as a whole. We therefore express our serious concern over the alarming human rights degradation in Taiwan, and we do take it as a signal of a negative trend undermining the values of democracy and human rights on which Taiwan should be based. Hoping that you will take into consideration the above mentioned concerns, I remain,
Yours sincerely,
Souhayr Belhassen
* FIDH President
Original page: http://www.fidh.org/spip.php?article6006
20/11/2008
Taiwan
Open letter to
* President Ma Ying-jeou
* Premier Liu Chao-hsuan
* Republic of China – Taiwan
Your Excellencies,
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is writing to you to express its deep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN Yunlin. FIDH believes that such arrests and violence are grave violations of human rights, under the pretext of national security.
According to the information received, since November 3rd, 2008, the city of Taipei has been heavily occupied by more than 7,000 police officers. The authorities have taken many drastic measures, including: confiscating and damaging private property, harassing and assaulting people who came too close to undefined or vaguely defined areas, clearing communal highway lanes with force, conducting random searches and arrests, and restricting the freedom of movement of citizens. These actions have been taken during Mr. CHEN’s visit, in the name of protecting security.
However, we fear these aggressions in fact aim at suppressing the right to freedom of expression of citizens. To supplement this violence, there are also unprecedented restrictions which clearly overpass the limits of ensuring security. For example, citizens have been restricted from displaying or carrying the national flag of Taiwan, forbidden to declare that “Taiwan is not part of China”, forbidden from carrying filming devices, and restricted from playing any music the authorities consider inappropriate.
These measures seem to be aimed at silencing political opinions rather than protecting security, and thus they blatantly violate the Constitution of Taiwan, notably Articles 11 and 14 which protect freedom of expression and international human rights standards. Consequently, FIDH requests that the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, bound by the Constitution and the national legislation, should be held responsible for violating their legal obligations. The Judicial Yuan and Control Yuan should immediately conduct independent and impartial investigations into all allegations of human rights violations and hold all personnel in office accountable for neglecting their civil and legal obligations, in line with the Judicial Yuan’s recent statement that “it is very important to form an objective and solid review standard, and make the constitutional reviews more predictable and trust-worthy to people”. Those who perpetrated these violations, particularly in the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, must be held accountable, in accordance with Article 24 of the Constitution of Taiwan, which stipulates that “Any public employee who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall, in addition to being subject to disciplinary punishment in accordance with law, be liable to criminal and civil action. The victim may, in accordance with law, claim damages from the State for any injury sustained therefrom.”
More generally, FIDH calls upon the government to amend the Parade and Assembly Law, in particular : to abolish the requirement for mandatory permits and adopt the system of voluntary basis and the clause on special area of restriction, which gives too much discretion to the authority to restrict people’s freedom of association and freedom of expression. In addition the authorities should abolish the order to dismiss as well as the provisions on special criminal punishment, which is a legacy of the martial law era. Finally, Taiwan should establish the protocol for law enforcement personnel who should have the obligation to clearly announce his or her identity when on duty, to ensure legitimacy and accountability.
Your Excellencies,
Our Organization firmly believes that the fruit of Taiwan’s remarkable democratization has landmark significance to the Asian continent as a whole. We therefore express our serious concern over the alarming human rights degradation in Taiwan, and we do take it as a signal of a negative trend undermining the values of democracy and human rights on which Taiwan should be based. Hoping that you will take into consideration the above mentioned concerns, I remain,
Yours sincerely,
Souhayr Belhassen
* FIDH President
Original page: http://www.fidh.org/spip.php?article6006
The State of Mind
in Taiwan in 21st century is similar to the state of mind in Europe before the French Revolution. The Taipei times has published a cartoon fitting to this situation, referring to the Ancien Régime, the old order (before the revolution):
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/photo/2008/11/19/2008032379
The old order in China was the imperial system and the philosophy of Confucius representing the state of mind of an ancient feudal state.
After the revolution Sun Yat-sen, tried to install a new order, based on the three principles of the people. Heavily influenced by his experience in Europe and North America, he wanted to install a multinational, socialistic, power separated constitutional democracy. To fit this system into a Chinese environment he chooses to adopt parts of the imperial system and of the philosophy of Confucius.
When Chiang Kai-shek, installed his dictatorship, officially the three principles were still the ideology of the Republic, but in fact only the imperial system and a rest of Confucius survived this process. He and his party became the new Emperors.
From Sun Yat-sen’s new order, the Republic of China has developed to a country were political philosophy is reduced to some: be quite, don’t think, follow your political leaders, teachers, parents, …. And of course work harder statements.
Has someone counted how many times, the KMT, leading Government officials or conservative journalists have used the term: work harder? Has someone compared it with the number of use of words like democracy or human rights?
I want to finish with linking some articles about Taiwan’s state of mind and the Strawberry movement in the Taipei Times (which is because of its cooperation with the British Guardian the most European of Taiwan’s Newspapers):
EDITORIAL: Ma should amend the assembly law
The dire straits of Taiwanese democracy
Student movements go high-tech
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/photo/2008/11/19/2008032379
The old order in China was the imperial system and the philosophy of Confucius representing the state of mind of an ancient feudal state.
After the revolution Sun Yat-sen, tried to install a new order, based on the three principles of the people. Heavily influenced by his experience in Europe and North America, he wanted to install a multinational, socialistic, power separated constitutional democracy. To fit this system into a Chinese environment he chooses to adopt parts of the imperial system and of the philosophy of Confucius.
When Chiang Kai-shek, installed his dictatorship, officially the three principles were still the ideology of the Republic, but in fact only the imperial system and a rest of Confucius survived this process. He and his party became the new Emperors.
From Sun Yat-sen’s new order, the Republic of China has developed to a country were political philosophy is reduced to some: be quite, don’t think, follow your political leaders, teachers, parents, …. And of course work harder statements.
Has someone counted how many times, the KMT, leading Government officials or conservative journalists have used the term: work harder? Has someone compared it with the number of use of words like democracy or human rights?
I want to finish with linking some articles about Taiwan’s state of mind and the Strawberry movement in the Taipei Times (which is because of its cooperation with the British Guardian the most European of Taiwan’s Newspapers):
EDITORIAL: Ma should amend the assembly law
The dire straits of Taiwanese democracy
Student movements go high-tech
Nov. 20 Wild Strawberries Respond to National Police Agency’s Evaluation of “Harmony Police Drill”
With regard to the November 18th evaluation of the “Harmony Police Drill” (協和演習), the National Police Agency based their conclusions solely on police reports and issued reprimands to only junior officers on duty for the harassment and excessive tactics during ARATS Chairman Chen Yun Lin’s visit. Commanding officers have yet to admit any mistakes with the overall security policy execution. The Wild Strawberries expressed regret towards such evaluation results and sympathy for the reprimanded junior officers.
For instance, the NPA investigation did not take into account the perspective of Sunrise Records. Owners stated that they did not voluntarily close the store and the store was in fact, forcibly shut down by the police. To add insult to injury, the responsible police department chief placed the blame on the owners instead of apologizing for closing a privately owned business. It is apparent that this investigation has not been conducted in a thorough or candid manner, and the NPA remains unapologetic towards the heavy-handed tactics which lacked legal basis; such an attitude has unfortunately compromised Taiwanese citizens’ confidence in law enforcement.
Moreover, the government has avoided providing any legal grounds for the recent controversial and heightened “public security maintenance measures” (e.g. balloon-flying in Chientan, forced entry of occupied hotel rooms at the Grand Hotel, destruction of national flags carried by private citizens, security checks of civilians and reporters near the Grand Hotel, blockage of the Chung-shan Bridge, confiscation of national flags outside of Taiwan Cement building, the Grand Formosa Regent Taipei Hotel incident, the forcible shutdown of Sunrise Records, and the police-civilian clashes near the Grand Hotel). Thus far, there has been insufficient explanation regarding whether law enforcement officers followed administrative procedures and no direct response to whether law enforcement tactics were indeed excessive.
Most importantly, the objective of the review was focused on whether the Chinese delegation was properly attended to (rather than whether citizens were fairly treated) and how to award/reprimand officers accordingly. As public servants, their blatant disregard for the welfare of citizens is simply unacceptable, especially in a democratic society. As such, we strongly urge the police and national security agencies to discuss the legality of their actions during Chen’s visit and re-examine apparent excessive law enforcement tactics. Perhaps a closer reexamination will allow the officials to finally understand the reasons behind the anger of Taiwanese citizens.
The Wild Strawberries re-emphasize that cases of power abuse during the heightened security period were not dispersed, isolated incidents. The prevalence of excessive tactics we have observed clearly suggests that high-level commanding officers were inept in formulating appropriate security measures and entirely disregarded fundamental human rights. Without a coherent strategy, junior law enforcement officers were unable to effectively and reasonably maintain public security, resulting in unfortunate (and oftentimes reluctant on the part of the junior officers) clashes with civilians. Once again, we call on the police and national security officials to reexamine the legality of their recent actions instead of punishing junior officers. The ability to admit to and accept responsibility for one’s mistakes is not only an act of bravery, but appropriate for a political appointee in a democratic society.
Translated from http://action1106.blogspot.com/2008/11/blog-post_3483.html
For instance, the NPA investigation did not take into account the perspective of Sunrise Records. Owners stated that they did not voluntarily close the store and the store was in fact, forcibly shut down by the police. To add insult to injury, the responsible police department chief placed the blame on the owners instead of apologizing for closing a privately owned business. It is apparent that this investigation has not been conducted in a thorough or candid manner, and the NPA remains unapologetic towards the heavy-handed tactics which lacked legal basis; such an attitude has unfortunately compromised Taiwanese citizens’ confidence in law enforcement.
Moreover, the government has avoided providing any legal grounds for the recent controversial and heightened “public security maintenance measures” (e.g. balloon-flying in Chientan, forced entry of occupied hotel rooms at the Grand Hotel, destruction of national flags carried by private citizens, security checks of civilians and reporters near the Grand Hotel, blockage of the Chung-shan Bridge, confiscation of national flags outside of Taiwan Cement building, the Grand Formosa Regent Taipei Hotel incident, the forcible shutdown of Sunrise Records, and the police-civilian clashes near the Grand Hotel). Thus far, there has been insufficient explanation regarding whether law enforcement officers followed administrative procedures and no direct response to whether law enforcement tactics were indeed excessive.
Most importantly, the objective of the review was focused on whether the Chinese delegation was properly attended to (rather than whether citizens were fairly treated) and how to award/reprimand officers accordingly. As public servants, their blatant disregard for the welfare of citizens is simply unacceptable, especially in a democratic society. As such, we strongly urge the police and national security agencies to discuss the legality of their actions during Chen’s visit and re-examine apparent excessive law enforcement tactics. Perhaps a closer reexamination will allow the officials to finally understand the reasons behind the anger of Taiwanese citizens.
The Wild Strawberries re-emphasize that cases of power abuse during the heightened security period were not dispersed, isolated incidents. The prevalence of excessive tactics we have observed clearly suggests that high-level commanding officers were inept in formulating appropriate security measures and entirely disregarded fundamental human rights. Without a coherent strategy, junior law enforcement officers were unable to effectively and reasonably maintain public security, resulting in unfortunate (and oftentimes reluctant on the part of the junior officers) clashes with civilians. Once again, we call on the police and national security officials to reexamine the legality of their recent actions instead of punishing junior officers. The ability to admit to and accept responsibility for one’s mistakes is not only an act of bravery, but appropriate for a political appointee in a democratic society.
Translated from http://action1106.blogspot.com/2008/11/blog-post_3483.html
21 Nov 2008
Protest against police violence! Fight for Freedom and Human Rights! Talk by LEE Ming-Tsung
Watch 抗議警察暴力！捍衛自由人權！發起人李明璁老師談話 in News Online | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com
[title]
Mistrust and Violence in Taiwanese Society: Three Stories
[subtitle]
Ming-Tsung Lee's speech in 1107, Freedom Square.
Lee is an associate professor in Dept. of Sociology, NTU
[text]
Freedom Square (2008/11/07): Ming-Tsung Lee, the initiator of the sit-in action in the Freedom Square for protesting the violence of the Police in 6th of November, talked about his experience in three little stories happened around the very first hours of the activity.
1
As the coordinator of the action, Ming-Tsung Lee got various threatening calls and sms, whether anonymous or not, from the very first moment the action initiated. “You’re nothing but an assist professor,” said one of the callers, "and I'm the professor. Do you still want to get promoted?” Ming-Tsung Lee is now an assistance professor in the Department of Sociology, NTU.
2
The police exerted violent to the sit-in students by their verbal humiliation. When the sit-in-students carried away by the policemen to where no media shoot, the policemen told the students “Stop acting. No one is shooting you. Just walk away by yourself."
These verbal humiliations made the student feel hurt, because it was the mistrustful response from the police to the good will which the student had showed in the past 20 hours. The students gave the policemen drinks, chat with them, and even gave them the lily flowers sent by the supporting people.
Ming-Tsung Lee would also like to protest for the distort reported by TVBS news. What the student showed to the police is good will, not the support as TVBS said.
3
Ming-Tsung Lee was applied physical violent by the policemen while being carried away from the square of Administration Yuan. He was pinched, kicked (to his private), and hit. In this video, he restated the three appeals, that are, President Ma and Premier Liu APOLOGIZE, Wang and Tsai STEP DOWN, and AMEND The Parade and Assembly Law.
These stories expressed the foundation of the reciprocal trust is destroyed in the Taiwanese society, and Ming-Tsung Lee thinks it is the government who should be responsible for.
Nov 20, Taipei, Wild Strawberries Movement Situation Report
Wild Strawberries Movement Update
Protest update
Protest in Liberty Square, Taipei:
• Apart from large rally, number of sit-in protest students remains consistent throughout the week, few in the dawn, significant more protesters joint after noon, peaked around 30-40 in late afternoon, based on these figures, The Movement has estimated that about 70 sit-in protesters are involved in weekday. The Movement attributed the declining number of sit-in protesters to cold weather and approaching mid-term exam for university students.
• The Movement has started organizing contact information of those involves in the protest, networking various civil societies, non -government organizations (NGO) and different sectors of society, with long-term objective of broadening Wild Strawberries’ appeal to the society at large.
• The issue of poor communication between sit-in student protesters and the Movement Headquarter has been resolved through the liaison conference held on 8th November, which clarified the chain of commands and updating the feed-back mechanism.
• Certain quarters of Society have expressed their interest in join the protest. The Movement decides that the protest will remain student only for the time being.
Protest in other cities
Hsinchu protest:
• Rotating-shift works quite well.
Taichung protest:
• Not enough student-protesters participating.
Chiayi protest:
• Not enough student-protesters, daily protester number remain single digit.
Tainan protest:
• Protesters high in spirit, confident that they can last all the way into mid-December
Kaohsiung protest:
• Threatened by the police for expressing anti-Ma (President) sentiments. Outlook for Kasohsiung protest remain pessimistic
Eastern Taiwan Protest:
• Under preparation
All regional protests are operational, though some difficulties have surfaced in the week, naming insufficient protesters and police interventions. No central command exists currently in Wild Strawberries Movement, all regional protest are organized in free association with Taipei protest, local protest can be organize and dissolve without the consent of Taipei protest organizer, it is imperative that, if the local leadership do wish to discontinue their protests, they shall consider possible affect on the morality of entire Wild Strawberries Movement. The Movement organizer here in Taipei hereby, urging those intent to discontinue protest, do consult with other regional and Taipei protest organizers first, so that ripple-effect can be avoid, morality be maintain, and best cause of action can be devise for the sake of movement.
External Supports
Academia:
• Academics are extremely enthusiastic about the causes of Wild Strawberries Movement; Seminars have been organized for protest students by university academic staff on diverse topics. The academics also held public lectures to educate the general public.
Non-Government Organization (NGO):
• Enthusiastic supporters from the beginning, providing both logistic and morale support to The Movement. Future co-operation on certain topics with The Movement have been identified. The Movement are grateful for NGOs’ support in resources, Public Relations expertise and expert advices by Professional NGOs.
Arts and Culture Community:
• Late comer, but no less then others in enthusiasm, organized and provided entertaining yet informative event last weekend. National Taipei Art University has announced its support for The Movement.
General Public:
• Provides both moral and logistic support, through some skirmish occurred in Taipei Protest between public supporting students and pro-government extremists. The decision on general public’s participation in actual sit-in protest is still under discussion.
Analysis
Executive branch of Government:
• The cabinet (The Executive Yuan) refused to admit the excess uses of violence against protesters during the week of Chinese Envoy’s visit; the cabinet praises the police action as “appropriate” and “Lawful”. The Ma administration shows no intention to neither negotiate nor respond to The Movement’s Twelve Demands. Furthermore, the ruling KMT party has pleaded its support to Ma’s stance; it is fear that with KMT’s majority in the assembly, amending the Law of Assemble and Parade would be extremely difficult.
• The Ma administration has refused to dismiss the two high officials whom the protesters have named and blamed for the violence, instead, as said by Ma, no apology would be offer, and no dismissal would be made.
• In light of Ma administration’s indifferences to protests’ plights, The Movement must re-consider it’s strategy in forcing the Government into negotiation, it is abundantly clear that the Ma administration will not dismiss culprits for the violence, will not apologize for the atrocities committed, and certainly no genuine will to amend the much derided Law of Assemble and Parade. Without extracting single concession from Government, The Movement is at risk of losing popular support and momentum.
Legislative branch of Government:
• Both DPP and KMT caucus have proposed their amendment of Law of Assemble and Parade, although the KMT version is far less satisfactory then those demanded by The Movement. Further, the KMT has mobilized its majority in the assembly to delay the public hearing date for the proposed amendments, hoping that the delay would wether public’s support and The Movement’s resolve.
Media:
• Media attentions have largely shift to the trial of former president Chen, Shui-Bien. The media also attempt to portray the Movement as pro-DPP fringe group, hence, politicising actions of Wild Strawberries. It is also noted, that rather then focuses on the plights of the Movement, the media prefer to report on the minor incidents, such as skirmish between supporting public and pro-government extremists, while ignoring original three demands put forwards by the students.
The Movement must refocus and re-energize in face of un-friendly media, government that want to neither negotiate nor respond, legislature that delayed amendment hearing through procedural means. New methods in forcing the Government into the negotiation table must be devise, Different demands for changes in the Law of Assemble and Parade from myriad NGOs must be consolidated in single, cohesive policy that can garners supports from the populace, safeguards basic human rights, reconcile the freedom of expression and needs in maintaining social cohesion.
Final Thoughts
New directives regarding the future action and organization of The Movement will be discuss in the coming days, The Movement will also propose its own version of amendment to the Law of Assemble and Parade in near future after consultations with students, NGOs, and Professional groups. Comments and thoughts about The Movement’s version of amendment are welcome, Suggestions in how to mobilize popular supports for this particular amendment is much appreciated.
Last and not least, in the spirit of democracy, Regional Protest Organizers are welcome in participating the decision making process of The Movement, any thoughts, comments, suggestions, are always appreciate here in Taipei.
Protest update
Protest in Liberty Square, Taipei:
• Apart from large rally, number of sit-in protest students remains consistent throughout the week, few in the dawn, significant more protesters joint after noon, peaked around 30-40 in late afternoon, based on these figures, The Movement has estimated that about 70 sit-in protesters are involved in weekday. The Movement attributed the declining number of sit-in protesters to cold weather and approaching mid-term exam for university students.
• The Movement has started organizing contact information of those involves in the protest, networking various civil societies, non -government organizations (NGO) and different sectors of society, with long-term objective of broadening Wild Strawberries’ appeal to the society at large.
• The issue of poor communication between sit-in student protesters and the Movement Headquarter has been resolved through the liaison conference held on 8th November, which clarified the chain of commands and updating the feed-back mechanism.
• Certain quarters of Society have expressed their interest in join the protest. The Movement decides that the protest will remain student only for the time being.
Protest in other cities
Hsinchu protest:
• Rotating-shift works quite well.
Taichung protest:
• Not enough student-protesters participating.
Chiayi protest:
• Not enough student-protesters, daily protester number remain single digit.
Tainan protest:
• Protesters high in spirit, confident that they can last all the way into mid-December
Kaohsiung protest:
• Threatened by the police for expressing anti-Ma (President) sentiments. Outlook for Kasohsiung protest remain pessimistic
Eastern Taiwan Protest:
• Under preparation
All regional protests are operational, though some difficulties have surfaced in the week, naming insufficient protesters and police interventions. No central command exists currently in Wild Strawberries Movement, all regional protest are organized in free association with Taipei protest, local protest can be organize and dissolve without the consent of Taipei protest organizer, it is imperative that, if the local leadership do wish to discontinue their protests, they shall consider possible affect on the morality of entire Wild Strawberries Movement. The Movement organizer here in Taipei hereby, urging those intent to discontinue protest, do consult with other regional and Taipei protest organizers first, so that ripple-effect can be avoid, morality be maintain, and best cause of action can be devise for the sake of movement.
External Supports
Academia:
• Academics are extremely enthusiastic about the causes of Wild Strawberries Movement; Seminars have been organized for protest students by university academic staff on diverse topics. The academics also held public lectures to educate the general public.
Non-Government Organization (NGO):
• Enthusiastic supporters from the beginning, providing both logistic and morale support to The Movement. Future co-operation on certain topics with The Movement have been identified. The Movement are grateful for NGOs’ support in resources, Public Relations expertise and expert advices by Professional NGOs.
Arts and Culture Community:
• Late comer, but no less then others in enthusiasm, organized and provided entertaining yet informative event last weekend. National Taipei Art University has announced its support for The Movement.
General Public:
• Provides both moral and logistic support, through some skirmish occurred in Taipei Protest between public supporting students and pro-government extremists. The decision on general public’s participation in actual sit-in protest is still under discussion.
Analysis
Executive branch of Government:
• The cabinet (The Executive Yuan) refused to admit the excess uses of violence against protesters during the week of Chinese Envoy’s visit; the cabinet praises the police action as “appropriate” and “Lawful”. The Ma administration shows no intention to neither negotiate nor respond to The Movement’s Twelve Demands. Furthermore, the ruling KMT party has pleaded its support to Ma’s stance; it is fear that with KMT’s majority in the assembly, amending the Law of Assemble and Parade would be extremely difficult.
• The Ma administration has refused to dismiss the two high officials whom the protesters have named and blamed for the violence, instead, as said by Ma, no apology would be offer, and no dismissal would be made.
• In light of Ma administration’s indifferences to protests’ plights, The Movement must re-consider it’s strategy in forcing the Government into negotiation, it is abundantly clear that the Ma administration will not dismiss culprits for the violence, will not apologize for the atrocities committed, and certainly no genuine will to amend the much derided Law of Assemble and Parade. Without extracting single concession from Government, The Movement is at risk of losing popular support and momentum.
Legislative branch of Government:
• Both DPP and KMT caucus have proposed their amendment of Law of Assemble and Parade, although the KMT version is far less satisfactory then those demanded by The Movement. Further, the KMT has mobilized its majority in the assembly to delay the public hearing date for the proposed amendments, hoping that the delay would wether public’s support and The Movement’s resolve.
Media:
• Media attentions have largely shift to the trial of former president Chen, Shui-Bien. The media also attempt to portray the Movement as pro-DPP fringe group, hence, politicising actions of Wild Strawberries. It is also noted, that rather then focuses on the plights of the Movement, the media prefer to report on the minor incidents, such as skirmish between supporting public and pro-government extremists, while ignoring original three demands put forwards by the students.
The Movement must refocus and re-energize in face of un-friendly media, government that want to neither negotiate nor respond, legislature that delayed amendment hearing through procedural means. New methods in forcing the Government into the negotiation table must be devise, Different demands for changes in the Law of Assemble and Parade from myriad NGOs must be consolidated in single, cohesive policy that can garners supports from the populace, safeguards basic human rights, reconcile the freedom of expression and needs in maintaining social cohesion.
Final Thoughts
New directives regarding the future action and organization of The Movement will be discuss in the coming days, The Movement will also propose its own version of amendment to the Law of Assemble and Parade in near future after consultations with students, NGOs, and Professional groups. Comments and thoughts about The Movement’s version of amendment are welcome, Suggestions in how to mobilize popular supports for this particular amendment is much appreciated.
Last and not least, in the spirit of democracy, Regional Protest Organizers are welcome in participating the decision making process of The Movement, any thoughts, comments, suggestions, are always appreciate here in Taipei.
Lament for Civil Rights
When the president of our country sells out the people’s basic civil rights, hurts the citizens’ fundamental human dignity, and disregards our voices, what’s left is the empty shell devoid of soul.
Tonight, artist Lily Wei, along with students of Wild Strawberries Movement warmed up for the participatory art event by lying on the ground and tracing the body contours of one another. There are now many human shapes in various positions drawn in chalk on Liberty Square. Lily Wei expresses: ‘Anyone who cares about human rights and liberty in Taiwan are welcome to join in the art in action’. You are invited to experience the pulse and heartbeats of one another together tomorrow afternoon, and to listen to the thundering outcries of the empty human figures.
Where: Liberty Square (the former Chiang-Kai Shek Memorial Hall).
When: Sunday November 23, 2008. 1:45 pm
What: Art in Action
Who: You and all those who care about the liberty of Taiwan.
Come, lie down with us on the ground to be part of the casualty of stolen autonomy.
Local citizens and international friends are welcome!
Participants please bring your masks, hats, and sunglasses. And a camera if you like!
Please wear black, grey or white if possible as symbol of mourning.
The Art Mobilize Taiwan Initiative
This day in History: Nuremberg Trials began
The Nuremberg Trials are a series of trials most notable for the prosecution of prominent members of the political, military and economic leadership of Nazi Germany. The trials were held in the city of Nuremberg, Germany, from 1945 to 1949, at the Nuremberg Palace of Justice. The first and best known of these trials was the Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal (IMT), which tried 24 of the most important captured leaders of Nazi Germany. It was held from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946. The second set of trials of lesser war criminals was conducted under Control Council Law No. 10 at the U.S. Nuremberg Military Tribunals (NMT), among them included the Doctors' Trial and the Judges' Trial. This article primarily deals with the IMT; see the separate article on the NMT for details on those trials.
Full Text and picture, please click The Free Dictionary
http://encyclopedia.tfd.com/Nuremberg+Trials
We shall not forget!
Full Text and picture, please click The Free Dictionary
http://encyclopedia.tfd.com/Nuremberg+Trials
We shall not forget!
Call for Taiwan Police to Stop Pressuring Media for Protest Information
2008 Nov 19
Press Release from International Federation of Journalist
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) urges Taiwan's National Police Agency (NPA) to stop asking media personnel for information about protesters at a recent public demonstration.
According to the Association of Taiwan Journalists (ATJ), an IFJ affiliate, members of the Taiwan police have reportedly asked media workers to provide photographs of demonstrators who participated in the "Yellow Ribbon Siege" protest against a meeting between Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou and chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Chen Yunlin on November 16. The protest was reportedly organised by the Democratic Progressive Political Party.
The ATJ said there were concerns that police would seek to pressure photojournalists who refused the request for information by approaching their employers.
"The police have put the reporters in grave danger by demanding that they rat on their interviewees," ATJ president Leon Chuang said.
On November 18, Leon Chuang and several reporters requested a meeting with NPA Director-General Wang Cho-chun to resolve the issue, but the request was declined.
"The duty of a journalist is to report the truth and to protect his or her sources. Journalists must not be compelled to act as agents to collect information on behalf of government authorities. Police interference of this kind places freedom of the independent press in jeopardy," IFJ Asia-Pacific said.
"The IFJ urges Taiwan's authorities to respect press freedom and ensure that they do not compromise journalists' integrity. All media outlets are also urged to defend press freedom and refrain from handing over photographs."
Increasing police pressure on Taiwan's media has been reported since early November. An independent documentary film-maker was detained by police while she was filming Chen in a hotel on November 4.. In a separate incident, a television reporter was assaulted by police who reportedly mistook him for a protester during the November 16 rally.
For further information contact IFJ Asia-Pacific on +612 9333 0919
The IFJ represents over 600,000 journalists in 120 countries worldwide
Press Release from International Federation of Journalist
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) urges Taiwan's National Police Agency (NPA) to stop asking media personnel for information about protesters at a recent public demonstration.
According to the Association of Taiwan Journalists (ATJ), an IFJ affiliate, members of the Taiwan police have reportedly asked media workers to provide photographs of demonstrators who participated in the "Yellow Ribbon Siege" protest against a meeting between Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou and chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Chen Yunlin on November 16. The protest was reportedly organised by the Democratic Progressive Political Party.
The ATJ said there were concerns that police would seek to pressure photojournalists who refused the request for information by approaching their employers.
"The police have put the reporters in grave danger by demanding that they rat on their interviewees," ATJ president Leon Chuang said.
On November 18, Leon Chuang and several reporters requested a meeting with NPA Director-General Wang Cho-chun to resolve the issue, but the request was declined.
"The duty of a journalist is to report the truth and to protect his or her sources. Journalists must not be compelled to act as agents to collect information on behalf of government authorities. Police interference of this kind places freedom of the independent press in jeopardy," IFJ Asia-Pacific said.
"The IFJ urges Taiwan's authorities to respect press freedom and ensure that they do not compromise journalists' integrity. All media outlets are also urged to defend press freedom and refrain from handing over photographs."
Increasing police pressure on Taiwan's media has been reported since early November. An independent documentary film-maker was detained by police while she was filming Chen in a hotel on November 4.. In a separate incident, a television reporter was assaulted by police who reportedly mistook him for a protester during the November 16 rally.
For further information contact IFJ Asia-Pacific on +612 9333 0919
The IFJ represents over 600,000 journalists in 120 countries worldwide
[Free--Partly Free--Not Free] Which status Taiwan will be in?
Status: Countries / Political rights Score / Civil rights Score
Free: Germany, France, Benelux, U.K., U.S.A., Canada, Scandinavian countries,.../1/1
Free: Japan, South Korea /1/2
^
| ? Is Taiwan going upward?
Free: TAIWAN /2/1
| ? Or downward?
ˇ
Partly Free: Hong Kong (China) /5/2
Partly Free: Singapore /5/4
Not Free: China /7/6
Not Free: North Korea, Tibet /7/7
Data from Map of Freedom, Freedom House, Washington
Free: Germany, France, Benelux, U.K., U.S.A., Canada, Scandinavian countries,.../1/1
Free: Japan, South Korea /1/2
^
| ? Is Taiwan going upward?
Free: TAIWAN /2/1
| ? Or downward?
ˇ
Partly Free: Hong Kong (China) /5/2
Partly Free: Singapore /5/4
Not Free: China /7/6
Not Free: North Korea, Tibet /7/7
Data from Map of Freedom, Freedom House, Washington
[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)
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.
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.
20 Nov 2008
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
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
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
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
19 Nov 2008
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.
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)
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)
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
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,
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.
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
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
18 Nov 2008
[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)
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.
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.
17 Nov 2008
[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.
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?
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
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)
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.
- 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."
16 Nov 2008
[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)
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
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
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
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)
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)
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)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
