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
19 Nov 2008
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)
15 Nov 2008
Mail Art Project – Mobilize Taiwan
Call for International Entries:
Mail Art Project – Mobilize Taiwan
This project is initiated in response to the Wild Berries Student Movement that started on November 6, 2008.
For additional information please refer to http://taiwanstudentmovement2008.blogspot.com/
We Need Your Support!
Voice your concern for the future of political freedom of the youth in Taiwan.
Letters, art objects, designs, musical composition and video works are welcomed.
E-mail your messages to:
mobilizetw@gmail.com
Entries with good intention will be displayed in front of Freedom Square in Taipei City.
Be Creative
Be Sincere
Be Constructive
Be Concerned
For Freedom
For Justice
For Peace
For Basic Human Rights
◘ The Mail Art – the Mobilize Taiwan Initiative 2008
Mail Art Project – Mobilize Taiwan
This project is initiated in response to the Wild Berries Student Movement that started on November 6, 2008.
For additional information please refer to http://taiwanstudentmovement2008.blogspot.com/
We Need Your Support!
Voice your concern for the future of political freedom of the youth in Taiwan.
Letters, art objects, designs, musical composition and video works are welcomed.
E-mail your messages to:
mobilizetw@gmail.com
Entries with good intention will be displayed in front of Freedom Square in Taipei City.
Be Creative
Be Sincere
Be Constructive
Be Concerned
For Freedom
For Justice
For Peace
For Basic Human Rights
◘ The Mail Art – the Mobilize Taiwan Initiative 2008
Taipei Poetry Festival
is the next big chance to protest with an international audience. Persuade the artists to support the protest in Taiwan. They will listen:
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=788954&lang=eng_news&cate_img=logo_taiwan&cate_rss=TAIWAN_eng
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=788954&lang=eng_news&cate_img=logo_taiwan&cate_rss=TAIWAN_eng
[China Post] Students to expand sit-in protest today
Updated Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:20 am TWN, CNA
TAIPEI, Taiwan -- The organizers of a recently established student movement pushing for reform of Taiwan’s assembly law announced yesterday their plan to expand their ongoing sit-in protest.
According to Lin Yu-hsuan, spokesman for the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement, the sit-in, which has been held at Taipei’s Liberty Square since last Friday, will be expanded on Saturday and is expected to draw approximately 1,000 participants, including student representatives from Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.
The sit-in once saw around 500 students participate, but the number has dropped to below 100 over the past few days as many returned to school to sit for midterm exams.
Lin said the group does not rule out the possibility that politicians sympathizing with their cause may be invited to take part. They have previously banned non students from participating.
Lin said the group will continue their peaceful demonstration until their appeals are answered, with disregard for possible dispersal by the police.
Over the past week, the group of students has been staging the sit-in to protest against what they called the use of excessive force by police to disperse pro-independence demonstrators who protested against the recent visit to Taiwan by a Chinese envoy.
The envoy, Chen Yunlin, president of the Beijing-based Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, is China’s top negotiator with Taiwan. He was in the country from Nov. 3-7 to sign four non-political pacts with his Taiwan counterpart Chiang Pin-kung, chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation.
Some protesters, who feared the visit and agreements would jeopardize Taiwan’s independence and sovereignty, threw bottles and rocks at police and pushed down police barricades. Police responded by spraying water at the protesters, scuffling with some of them, and arresting others.
In addition to demanding an open apology from President Ma Ying-jeou and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan, the student group is also asking for the replacement of National Security Bureau Director General Tsai Chao-ming and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun.
Furthermore, the students want the Parade and Assembly Law be amended to relax its restrictions on people’s right to demonstrate. Protesters had complained their application to protest in many areas were rejected. Ma said in a radio interview Wednesday that Minister of the Interior Liao Liou-yi has on many occasions apologized over the alleged misconduct by law-enforcement officers and promised to review the methods adopted by the police in performing their duties.
Ma admitted there was room for improvement in the performance of Tsai and Wang in handling the demonstrations, but said “this was not to an extent where they should be removed from their posts.”
The president said the legislative caucus of the ruling Kuomintang will hold a public hearing to discuss a possible amendment to the Parade and Assembly law, with representatives of the protesting students to be invited to express their opinions at the hearing.
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/2008/11/15/183266/Students-to.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
