-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
1/12
Progress
JUNE 2009
DEMOCRACY&PROGRESS
Department of
International Affairs
Democratic Progressive
Party
8F, No. 30, Pei-Ping East Rd.
Taipei, Taiwan
t. 886-2-23929989 ext. 306f. 886-2-23930342
e-mail: [email protected]
web: http://www.dpp.org.tw
Director:
Hsiao, Bi-khim
Deputy Director:
Huang, Chih-ta
Hsieh, Huai-hui
Editor-In-Chief:
Liu, Hsiaoching
Editor:
Michael J. Fonte
Campaign for the ECFA Referendum ------------------- p2 Letter
from DPP Chairperson Dr. Tsai and the joint
statement on the reform of the detention system,
implementation of human rights in the administration
of justice and an immediate end to the detention of
former president Chen Shui-bian------------------------- p5
Diplomatic Truce and Cross-Strait Reconciliation:Diminishing
Commitment of the Taiwan Governmentto Democratic Solidarity?
----------------------------------p8
Taiwan Redraws Administrative Zones --------------- p10
DPP Poll on Ma's policy of knowing the traditional butwriting
simplified characters, President Ma as the
KMT Party Chairman and Taiwan Economy and
Employment-p11
Democracy &
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
2/12
2
Campaign for the ECFA Referendum
Event blog: http://ecfa.pixnet.net/blog
DPP Chairperson Dr. Tsai Ing-wens Open letter to Taiwans
citizen/masters
Using Democracy To Protect Taiwan is Our Only Choice
June 15, 2009
There are three reasons for the ECFA referendum. First, no
matter what the content of an ECFA
might be, it will determine the economic integration of Taiwan
and China and is bound to change the
future fate of Taiwan. This will have a vital, critical impact
on our people and our children. Second,
if we are successful in this referendum, it sets as a principle
that any major future cross-strait
agreement must undergo a citizens referendum and not simply be
done by the government. Finally,
the relationship of Taiwan and China is the source of the
domestic political divisions. The best way to
resolve these disputes is through a democratic mechanism.
We stand at the threshold of initiating a Taiwan referendum. We
face a high wall, but we must be people whohave the courage to
climb this high wall. We must not lose heart.
We need to get more than 80,000 initial sponsors to petition for
this referendum, then 800,000 to support itsbeing a ballot measure,
and finally 8 million to vote on it in order to have it pass. This
is indeed the strictest, mostconstrained referendum system in the
whole world, thanks to the KMT Legislative Yuan majority forcing
such aproduct on us. The referendum law we have was designed not to
affirm the use of referenda but to block directdemocracy.
So many people are asking: why is the Democratic Progressive
Party launching this referendum petition? Is it sonecessary to
demand that the government put the signing of an ECFA to a decision
by a referendum?
There are three reasons. First, no matter what the content of an
ECFA might be, it will determine the economicintegration of Taiwan
and China and is bound to change the future fate of Taiwan. This
will have a vital, criticalimpact on our people and our children.
The power to decide something of this importance cannot be left
solely inthe hands of the president and a minority of the ruling
class. Otherwise the public benefits of citizens will betransferred
into the private gain of this ruling group.
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
3/12
3
Second, if we are successful in this referendum, it sets as a
principle that any major future cross-strait agreementmust undergo
a citizens referendum and not simply be done by the government.
Then the current birdcagereferendum must be amended. The legal
responsibility to call a referendum could be re-granted to the
ExecutiveBranch. Then, when the government wants to see a
referendum pass, it would be willing to lower the highthresholds in
the current referendum system. This would knock down this high wall
we have now and allowcitizens to have a more complete direct
democracy.
Finally, the relationship of Taiwan and China is the source of
the domestic political divisions. The best way toresolve these
disputes is through a democratic mechanism. Each party has its own
approach and there could be nobetter way than to let the people
judge the parties and their approaches. If the ruling group really
is interested inselling out Taiwan, then only a democratic
mechanism can serve to guard Taiwan as a last line of defense. This
iswhat the Democratic Progressive Party advocates by the principle
of Use Democracy to Protect Taiwan.
The harsh reality is that it is extremely difficult to hurdle
the high threshold for a referendum to pass. But if wegive up and
do not challenge this reality, with the exception of taking to the
streets or a legislative struggle, whatother tool do we have to
check the power of this party-state-rolled-into-one-China-leaning
president?
Referendum campaigns in Taiwan have not become a common
political practice. In fact there is something of astigma attached
to them. However, this ECFA referendum has to be distinguished from
past referenda. First of all
this will be the first Taiwan referendum campaign that will seek
to be a check on Executive Branch power.Facing the Ma
Administrations lean-toward-China policy, even though the DPP
launched a full-scaleparliamentary and street protest campaign we
were not able to block the flow of Mas policy. So a referendum
isthe only choice we have left. This is almost mortal combat to
show the power of the people to a governmentwhich ignores public
opinion.
Another difference is that in the past the referenda were
initiated by the government about the governmentspolicy agenda. But
this ECFA referendum agenda is 100% from the grassroots. Signing an
ECFA has stirred thehearts of people about workers rights, about
the very survival of small and medium sized enterprises and
aboutthe threat to our agricultural sector. This political agenda
is a major source of controversy so the people are usingthe
referendum to show that their choices are not the same as those of
the government. Thus it gives thisreferendum a very unique
democratic meaning and implication.
This is why, if we want this referendum to pass, we have to take
a different approach than in the past.
Whether it is 1 million petitioners or 8 million voting, we will
have to have people beyond the green-bluepolitical lines
participating. So it is necessary that this time the referendum
campaign take the shape of a society-wide one. We are organizing
100,000 people to be a vanguard to get the petition drive started.
Once theReferendum Commission has accepted the petition as valid,
this vanguard of 100,000 will use their network witheach one
garnering 10 voters so that we can get over the second hurdle in
having a referendum put to all thepeople.
If this one million strong force brings others out to vote on
the referendum then we have a chance to hurdle thehigh wall of this
birdcage referendum. This is a challenging task, even more daunting
than getting 600,000 people
out for our street demonstration of May 17th. However, faced
with a president and ruling party that pays noattention to the
people, we must rise up united and show our great strength.
I can imagine that President Ma, who will soon have total
control of the KMT party, the government and themilitary, will not
welcome this referendum which challenges his cross-strait policy.
There is no doubt that theKMT will again boycott this referendum
even through the Referendum Review Committee under the
ExecutiveYuan. However, as a democratically elected president, why
would President Ma do this? If President Ma's policydoes meet
people's interest, why is he afraid of a people's referendum on his
policy? If President Ma can support areferendum on whether to allow
setting up a casino in Taiwan and even authorize that this
referendum beexempted from the threshold requirements, why does he
insist that there is no need for referendum on a policy,like ECFA,
that has a much greater and long-term impact on our country?
In fact, President Ma should welcome the referendum on an ECFA
as backing for his negotiations with China. Ifa referendum becomes
mandatory for an ECFA, Taiwan negotiators can take a more confident
and firm positionwhen fighting for Taiwan's best national interests
instead of letting China have its way. Democracy is the
mostpowerful weapon Taiwan has. If President Ma does not understand
how to utilize this show of public opinion,
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
4/12
4
than it indicates not only that he lacks confidence in democracy
but that he also despises the true voice of thepeople.
I would like to invite every citizen/master of this country who
has a heartfelt love of Taiwan to join ourcampaign. Faced with a
roaring countercurrent of authoritarianism in our politics and
economic overdependenceon China, join us in this last line of
democratic defense of our land, our Taiwan!
Polls show that
81% of CEOs in Taiwan do not know what the ECFA is. (Common
Wealth Magazine, May 2009)85.9 percent of the public still had no
clear idea about the contents of the accord, while 55.2 percentwere
worried about its impact on their lives. (Taiwan Thinktank Survey,
June 2009)
63.7% of people thought that the ECFA would have an impact on
Taiwans sovereignty, and that itshould ultimately be decided
through a referendum. (DPP Poll in March, 2009)
70.6 % of Taiwanese think there should be a referendum about an
eventual Economic CooperationFramework with China. And 71% agree
that any important treaty should be put up to a nationwide
vote.
(Taiwan Thinktank Survey, June 2009)
89.2% believe the policy should be fully discussed and overseen
by the Legislative Yuan, and 78.2%agreed that the ruling party
should reach consensus with the opposition before negotiating deals
likeECFA. ( DPP Poll in March, 2009)
80.2% opposed signing a cross-strait agreement, like ECFA, under
the One-China Principle. ( DPP Pollin March, 2009)
Overview of the referendum system in Taiwan
The Referendum Act stipulates that to hold a referendum in
Taiwan
Step 1: The signatures of 0.5% of eligible voters (approximately
80,000) must be collected to apply to hold areferendum.
Step 2: The petitions are then to be sent to the Central
Election Committees Referendum Review Committee forreview.
Step 3: If the proposal passes the review, the signature of 5%
of eligible voters (approximately 800,000) must becollected within
six months in order for the referendum to actually be put to a
vote.If the proposal is rejected by the Committee, then
administrative appeal can be filed with the Executive
Yuan.
Step 4: 50% of eligible voters (approximately 8,000,000) must
vote on the referendum for the vote to be valid.
How Will We Do It? 100,000 strong ECFA Referendum Vanguard
Campaign
Facing the high thresholds- whether it is 1 million petitioners
or 8 million voting, we will have to have peoplebeyond the
green-blue political lines participating. So it is necessary that
this referendum campaign take the shapeof a society-wide one. Thus,
we are now recruiting 100,000 volunteers (the ECFA Referendum
vanguard) to getthe petition drive started.
(How to Join the ECFA Referendum vanguard?
http://ecfa.pixnet.net/blog/post/25573929)
For this 100,000 strong vanguard, there are three major
tasks:
1) Complete the collection of 100,000 signatures for the first
stage petition required for holding a referendum;
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
5/12
5
2) Once the Referendum Commission has accepted the petition as
valid, this vanguard of 100,000 will usetheir network with each one
garnering 10 voters so that we can get over the second hurdle in
having areferendum put to all the people.
3) Continue to push for the Safeguard Taiwan! Oppose the
Lean-towards-China Policy campaign amongthe people.
This is a challenging task, even more daunting than getting
600,000 people out for our street demonstration of May17th.
However, its a process of civic education. Moreover, faced with a
president and ruling party that pay noattention to the people, we
must rise up united and show our great strength.
Letter from DPP Chairperson Dr. Tsai on FormerPresident Chen
Shui-bians Civil Rights
June 30, 2009
Dear Friends,
I wish to call your attention to the attached statement, which I
have co-signed with a number of prominentacademics, lawyers and
civic leaders, regarding the issue of former President Chen
Shui-bians detention.
A fair and independent judiciary is a crucial element of a
strong democratic system, and public confidence in theimpartiality
of the judiciary is essential to strengthening its capacity.
Unfortunately, instead of growing publicconfidence in the
governments efforts to prosecute official corruption, abuses of the
system, as outlined in theattached statement, are eroding public
credibility in judicial institutions.
As leader of the political party that has championed democratic
reforms in Taiwan for nearly three decades, it
pains me to see that the Taiwanese people are losing confidence
in the political impartiality of the judiciary, andthat fundamental
human rights and the integrity of Taiwans former president are
vulnerable to abuses of thelaw. Although the attached statement is
focused on the case of President Chen, his case is not an isolated
one. Iam also concerned that many more defendants have been
subjected to similar treatment. I am further worried that this
prolonged and unjustified incarceration of President Chen during
the investigation period and trial issowing the seeds of long-term
public unrest and division.
We are appealing, therefore, for President Chens human rights to
be respected by the Judiciary and for hisimmediate release.
As friends of Taiwan and observers of developments in Taiwan,
you must be aware that since former PresidentChens arrest and
incarceration incommunicado on November 12 last year, he has been
detained for more thantwo hundred days. The signatories and I
believe that his continued detention is unjustified and in
violation ofPresident Chens basic rights.
For reasons highlighted in the statement, the impartiality of
the judicial system is in doubt, and we believe thatformer
President Chen is being deprived of the right to a fair trial.
Furthermore, violations in the confidentialityof the investigation,
and the selective leaking of unverified information regarding the
specifics of the case topoliticians and the press, further indicate
a failure of law enforcement institutions to protect the rights of
thedefendant during the trial process.
I have repeatedly urged the government to take seriously the
responsibility of protecting the fundamental rightsof the
defendant, and to refrain from any political interference in the
judicial process that insults the integrity
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
6/12
6
and basic rights of our former President. The fairness of
President Chens trial will be indicative of Taiwansdemocratic
progress, and the Taiwanese people will not tolerate growing abuses
in the system.
I also urge our international friends, especially those of you
who have stood with us in the past through themore difficult years
of fighting for democracy and freedom in Taiwan, to continue to
stand with us as wedemand a fair and just legal system.
Sincerely,
Tsai Ing-wen
Chairperson
The joint statement signed by 10 law yers, scholars, and
civil right activists: calling for the reform of the
detention system, implementation of human rights inthe
administration of justice and an immediate end to
the detention of former president Chen Shui-bian
June 25, 2009
We firmly believe that an independent, impartial judiciary is
fundamental to the rule of law for any democraticcountry. The legal
responsibility for anyone in the justice system must be determined
through a fair procedure,without any prejudice. Only then will
decisions made by the courts have any credibility in society.
Looking at our current
detention system,
it is obvious that the prerequisites for detention are loose,
and theperiod of each detention could last up to two months with
the possibility of repeated extensions. This system hasbeen abused
to the extent that defendants are in actuality serving the penalty
of incarceration prior to the trial. For along time, this has
caused irreparable damage to the personal freedom of defendants.
Therefore, from a humanrights perspective, there is an urgent
necessity to launch a comprehensive reform and review of the
shortcomings ofthe detention system. Since President Ma Ying-jeou
has signed two international human rights conventions andrelated
protocols, the administration should demonstrate its endorsement of
human rights by the concrete action ofimplementing the spirit of
those treaties in Taiwans domestic law.
We believe that human rights are priceless. To minimize the
possible violation of human rights, judicial officialsshould be
allowed to execute the power of detention only when the strictest
prerequisites are met. Constitutionalinterpretation No. 653 by the
Council of Grand Justices states the following: Detaining and
placing restriction onthe personal freedom of the defendant under
criminal charge will isolate him/her from his/her family, society
and
career and have a detrimental impact on his/her personal rights,
such as reputation and credibility. This is the mostsevere form of
intervention regarding personal freedom, thus it should be used
with extreme caution and only as thelast resort for protecting the
procedure. Unless all the prerequisites stipulated by law have been
met to verify itsnecessity, detention must not be lightly
exercised. However, the case of former President Chen has
clearlyillustrated that the legal rights of our former head of
state have not been protected. This being so, how we can everensure
that the rights of ordinary citizens will not be violated?
We believe that the court decisions to repeatedly detain
President Chen are unreasonable and unnecessary, andhave severely
damaged the credibility of our judicial system. The court has
listed several actions by President Chenas reasons to extend his
detention, such as: Denying his guilt, publishing books, accepting
visits from foreignpress, reapplying for membership in the
Democratic Progressive Party, and not feeling well. The court has
alsoaccused former President Chen of assaulting the justice system
when he was simply exercising his litigation
strategy of: no confession, no plea, no summoning witnesses and
cross-examinations. These reasons cited bythe court are irrelevant
to the legal prerequisites for detention: flight risk, destruction
of evidence, alteration orfabrication of evidence, or conspiracy
with any accomplice or witness. Besides, there were clear
violations of theprinciple ofgesetzlicher Richter () regarding the
changing of judges. (In this case, the Presiding
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
7/12
7
Judge of the case Chou Chan-chun () was replaced in the middle
of the trial by Tsai Shou-hsun ()and as soon as Tsai became
Presiding Judge, he immediately reversed Chous original ruling that
there was nolonger a legal necessity to detain former President
Chen, and announced the decision to extend his detentionperiod.)
These controversies have raised public doubts about the neutrality
of the judiciary.
Indeed, President Chen has disappointed the society with his
inability to handle the behavior of his familymembers, as well as
his failure to manage separately his political contributions and
his private property. His familymembers wired money abroad, thus
failing his commitment to the people. However, no matter what
verdict former
President Chen receives or how history judges him, respecting
his legal right to a fair trial should be fundamentalvalue shared
by our society. The mishandling of his case has highlighted the
deficiencies of the system. Theemotional likes or dislikes of the
society toward the defendant should not be allowed to overwhelm our
concernsabout the system itself.
An independent and fair judicial system that is trusted by the
public should be a source of strength for the judiciary.A fair
trial of former President Chen will fortify Taiwans democracy. This
long-term detention of President Chenhas already created tremendous
damage to the image and credibility of our judicial system. It has
also created moredivisions, confrontations and tensions within our
society which will seriously endanger the development ofTaiwans
democracy.
Out of a need to cherish our democracy and protect justice, we
call for the immediate release of former President
Chen. The government should take immediate action to reform the
detention system that has violated basic rights,as well as amend
related laws, such as the Criminal Procedure Law. Before the laws
are amended, the judiciaryshould execute its authority of detention
with extreme caution to minimize the violation of the rights. We
all hopethat by starting from the point of protecting human rights,
we will then promote judicial reform and thus thefoundation of
Taiwans democracy will be strengthened.
This joint statement was signed by a group of 10 lawyers,
scholars, and civil right activists listed below: (inalphabetical
order)
Dr. Chen Chien-Jen (), Professor, National Taiwan University
Dr. Chen Hwei-Syin (), Dean, the College of Law, National
Chengchi University
Dr. Chiu Hei-Yuan (), Research Fellow, Institute of Sociology,
Academia Sinica
Dr. Huang, Juei-Min (), Chairman, Judicial Reform Foundation
Dr. Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao (), Research Fellow,, Institute of
Sociology, Academia Sinica
Lee Yuan-chen (), Founder, the Awakening Foundation
Dr. Lee Yuan-tseh (), former President, Academia Sinica
Wellington Koo (), Chairman, Taiwan Bar Association
Dr. Ku Chung-hwa (), Chairman, Citizen Congress Watch
Dr. Tsai Ingwen (), Chairperson, Democratic Progressive
Party
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
8/12
8
Diplomatic Truce and Cross-Strait Reconciliation:Diminishing
Commitment of the TaiwanGovernment to Democratic Solidarity?
Since President Ma Ying-Jeou announced his policies of a
diplomatic truce and cross-strait reconciliation, the DPPhas been
closely following the possible social, economic and political
impact China would bring on Taiwan in thisrapidly opening
relationship. Therefore, in each newsletter, we provide our readers
updates on Taiwans situationand the latest public polls on various
issues. In November/December 2008, we reported the police violence
and therestriction placed by the government on peoples freedom of
speech during Chinese envoy Chen Yunlins visit, theWild
Strawberries Movement and our concern about the beginning of the
political witch hunt of our party leadersand former officials. In
January, Dr. Tsai received a Freedom House delegation to address
those issues (withspecial emphasis on the governments intention to
amend the Assembly and Parade Law to further restrict
peoplesfreedom of assembly by giving police more power to
intervene). In February, Dr. Tsai announced that 2009 is theDPPs
social movement year and warned that the current KMT administration
is dragging Taiwanese societyback to the old, conservative and
autocratic society [] we have to keep up the dynamic energy of
Taiwansdemocracy and to integrate with social powers (grassroots
and civic organizations) to breathe along with society.In March, we
continued to call for transparency and accountability in the
governments black-box cross-straitnegotiations with China on
important issues such as Taiwans participation in WHO and WHA, and
the signing of
a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, CEPA. In May,
after receiving no responses from the Maadministration on requests
raised in two major rallies last year and two Taiwan Citizen
Conferences on NationalAffairs in February and March, the DPP
launched a large-scale demonstration on May 17 followed by a 24 hr
sit-in to protest the governments amendments of the Assembly and
Parade Law. In May and June, there weremany important international
human rights crises in Tibet, China, and Burma. However, the
Magovernments passive attitude or even ignorance towards those
issues has caused us new worries.
We observed that there is a convergence between China and our
government in terms of the politicallanguage they use and the
alliances they made. This is really worrisome, stated DPP
Department ofInternational Affairs Director Hsiao Bi-khim.
Taiwans efforts to preserve the important assets of democracy,
freedom and human rights have beenaffirmed by international
society. While the Ma Administration is aggressively moving forward
with cross-strait exchanges, President Ma not only does not make
good use of this advantage to support thedemocratization of China
and let democracy and human rights become the common language in
cross-straitaffairs, but, rather, he becomes an accomplice of the
Chinese governments suppression on democracy andhuman rights. This
is completely unacceptable .... We wanted to use Taiwan as a
democratic model forChina. But the way things are going, China may
change Taiwan before we have a chance to change China,she
added.
1. Government intervened in the personnel of the Taiwan
Foundation for Democracy (TFD) and theoperation of the Taiwan-Tibet
Exchange Foundation (TTEF) to stop them from offering support
to
pro-democracy movements in Tibet.
It has been widely reported by the Taiwanese media recently that
Ma administration intended to make majorchanges to the governing
boards of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy to stop it from
offering financial supportto pro-democracy movements in China,
Tibet and Cuba for fear of provoking China. The TFD was founded in
2003under the DPP administration with the aim at promoting
democracy and human rights around the world.
DPP Spokesperson Cheng Wen-tsang criticized President Mas
attempt to please China at the expense of Taiwansinternational
image. He also sent the world the wrong message that Taiwan
supports China's actions. This really seriouslydamaged Taiwans
international image and credibility as a country that values and
actively promotes democracyand human rights. He also pointed out
that supporting democracy and human rights should not be a partisan
issueand should be free from political interference. He urged
President Ma to respect TFD Chairman Wang Jin-pyngsdecision as well
as TFDs long tradition to keep the TFD a bipartisan thinktank.
This news has drawn wide concern from civic groups both in
Taiwan and the US. US House of RepresentativesRep.Robert Andrews (D
- NJ) wrote to US President Barack Obama asking him to urge
President Ma Ying-jeouand his administration to let the TFD do its
useful work the way it has done over the past six years, according
tothe Taipei Times on June 21 and 22. Recently, news reports from
Taiwan have come to our attention that the
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
9/12
9
administration of Taiwans President Ma Ying-jeou is planning to
curtail the activities of the Taiwan Foundationfor Democracy,
reversing the Foundations policies of supporting democratic
movements in other countries ongrounds that this may offend the
autocratic government of the Peoples Republic of China and
replacing the TFDspersonnel with people sympathetic to this
accommodationalist philosophy.
In his letter, Rep. Andrews expressed his concern that the Ma
administration was seeking accommodation withChina at the expense
of freedom and democracy, not only in Taiwan itself, but also in
China and Tibet.This would constitute another blow to Taiwans
vibrant democracy.
Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy
(NED), wrote to President Ma Ying-jeou to call on him not to
interfere with the structure and policies of the TFD. The TFD has
been able to fulfill itspromise over the last six years because of
two attributes that have also contributed to the NEDs success. The
firstis its independence and arms-length relationship to the
government that have enabled it to carry out its mission freeof
political interference or control; and the second is a commitment
to bipartisanship in its governance, so that nomatter which party
is in government, the operations and basic direction of the
Foundation will remain constant, hesaid. I am concerned that such
an overhaul could well compromise both the Foundations
independenceand the quality of its work. But I am even more
troubled by the negative message it would send to those whohave
regarded the Foundation as an expression not of one particular
partisan point of view but rather as anexpression of the commitment
of the people of Taiwan to democratic solidarity, he added.
Another case being unveiled by the local media is that the
operation of the Taiwan-Tibet Exchange Foundation(TTEF), which was
also founded under the DPP administration in 2002 with the aim of
providing humanitarianassistance to exile Tibetan communities and
facilitate contact between the Taiwanese government and the
TibetanGovernment in Exile, had been suspended since the KMT
government took office last year and the foundationsongoing
humanitarian aid projects halted.
2. President Ma remained silent at the 20 year-anniversary of
the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989and the recent arrest of
Chinese activist Liu Xiaobo
Because of the publication of "Charter '08", China has detained
well-known writer and democratic reform leaderLiu Xiaobo for the
past seven months. In June 24, the Chinese government went even one
step further, arrestinghim on charges of "incitement to subvert
state power." However, since last year when the Chinese
government
started to crack down on the
Charter
08
campaign, the Ma Administration has been silent.
MaAdministration has also turned a blind eye to the Chinese
government's suppression of those associated with thedemocratic
reform movement in China. In his statement regarding the Tiananmen
Square protests of 1989,President Ma even publicly affirmed the
importance China gives to democracy and human rights.
3. Taiwan's External Trade Development Council (TAITRA) signed a
memorandum of understanding(MoU) on bilateral trade with the
Burmese military junta
While growing voices from the international community call for
heavier sanctions on the Burmese military junta,Taiwan's External
Trade Development Council (TAITRA) of the Ministry of Economic
Affairs signed amemorandum of understanding (MoU) on bilateral
trade with Burma on June 13, 2009 aimed at encouraging
Taiwanese business to invest in Burma.
DPP legislator Tien Chiu-chin and free Burma activists expressed
their harshest condemnation of this trade pact.As the international
community condemns the military junta for its authoritarian rule
and violation ofhuman rights our government seems to care more
about making money than democratic values. Insteadof trying to
establish closer economic relations with Burmas military junta,
Tien urged the Maadministration to support Burmese democracy
activists. President Ma should ask the military junta torelease
Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners in Myanmar, she
added.
Amnesty International Taiwan Chairman ChangTieh-chih commented
that with more and more Taiwanesepeople (especially students)
caring about international human rights issues, what the Ma
administration did wascompletely against the most prevalent opinion
in Taiwan society. What the Ma administration did was leading
Taiwan, one of the most important democratic countries in Asia
region, in a rollback of its democratic progress.This MOU is a
shame to our country , he said.
Nyo Ohn Myint, Chairman of the International Committee of the
National League for Democracy Liberated Areas (NLD-LA) argued that
the investment will only benefit the military junta and their
family
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
10/12
10
members, not the people in Burma. He stated, Today, the people
of Taiwan enjoy democracy and freedom becausemany political
activists sacrificed for the cause . We do regret seeing that a few
countries have only economicinterest [in Burma] without considering
how much the people of Burma have suffered. He also added
thatbecause Taiwan wants to build a good relationship with China,
it is also building a good relationship withChinas ally Burma.
The Ma government should include democracy and human rights in
the list of topics of cross-straitexchanges, so that interaction
between Taiwan and China is based on the universal values of human
rights
and democracy. This should be a prerequisite for normal
cross-strait exchanges. Only if there is democracy inChina can the
two sides find a common value system and thus there will be
equality and normal exchanges betweenthe two sides. If this
condition is met, then and only then will Taiwan and Chinas
development not be in dangerof turning upside down overnight, DPP
Chairperson Dr. Tsai Ing-wen said. The development of
Chinasdemocracy and human rights will not only affect Taiwan but,
over the next decade or two, will affectdevelopment and stability
throughout Asia.
Taiwan Redraws Administrative Zones
The Ministry of the Interior announced on June 24 its
preliminary decision on restructure administrative zonesacross the
island: upgrade Taipei County to special municipal status and merge
Kaohsiung City and KaohsiungCounty, merge Taichung City and
Taichung County, and, after additional review, merge Tainan City
and TainanCounty, while the proposed mergers of Chiayi and Yunlin
counties, both of which are DPP-governed areas, wererejected. This
proposal was approved by the Executive Yuan on July 2nd.
According to the Local Government Law, a municipal city must
have a population of more than 1.25 million andpossess a special
need in the development of its political, economic, and cultural
arenas. Prior to this re-drawing ofTaiwan's administrative map, the
only two cities with municipal status were Taipei City and
Kaohsiung City. Thesetwo cities split 43% of all allocated funding
while the other 23 cities and counties received 39% in total.
Theupgrade paves the way for more financial support from the
central government and political power for the localadministration
involved.
The political implications of the plan are also significant, as
the DPP and the KMT prepare for island-wide mayoraland country
magistrate elections in December, and now elections for Taipei
County, Kaohsiung County, TaichungCounty and Taichung City are
postponed. DPP Spokesperson Cheng Wen-tsang criticized the
postponement asunconstitutional and undemocratic. He called on
lawmakers to file a request with the Council of Grand Justices fora
ruling on the constitutionality of the changes.
Cheng said the DPP always encourages equal rights for cities and
counties as well as balanced development andfair allocation of
resources for all regions. Merger and upgrades of local counties
and cities would help each regiondevelop economically on a greater
scale as well as more effectively utilize the unique
characteristics andadvantages of each individual area. Thus the DPP
encourages the merging of cities and counties in expansion
intolarger political entities when appropriate. However, the
government should release records pertaining to thecommittee review
and hearing on the 23
rd, so society can understand the committees reasons for
accepting certain
proposals and denying others- specifically, the denial of the
merger and upgrade of Chiayi and Yunlin counties.
While the newly upgraded cities are entitled to more budgetary
support from the central government than before,the government has
ensured that support for the two existing municipal cities, Taipei
and Kaohsiung, wouldremain at the same level. The Executive Yuan
would need to propose its budget allocation plan as soon aspossible
to explain how the government will manage the new budgetary demands
in order to support the newmunicipal cities. Cheng said.
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
11/12
11
DPP Poll
Ma's policy of know ing the traditional but writing
simplifiedcharacters
(The survey was conducted on June 10 with sample size 708 and
sampling error about 3.76% at 95% confidence level)1. 75.6% of
respondents opposed the statement:President Ma Ying-jeou, in order
to accelerate cross-strait cultural
exchanges, intends to promoteknow traditional, use simplified
characters. 17.1 percent were in favor.
Even 67% of pan-blue supporters opposed the use of simplified
Chinese characters.2. 51.2% of respondents think that "know
traditional, write simplified characters" is a preparation by
President Ma for
cross-strait unification, while 32.1 percent of people do not
think so.
76% of pan-green supporters believe that the use of simplified
Chinese characters in writing is preparation forunification. 37% of
pan-blue supporters have indicated similar sentiments while 50%
oppose.
A higher percentage of swing voters believe that the action is
for unification, with 48% believing and 30% opposing.3. 64.9%
believe that President Ma Ying-jeou will lead Taiwan toward
unification, and only 6.3% of people think he is
moving toward independence. 28.8% have no opinion.
Among pan-blue supporters and undecided voters 57% think
President Ma Ying-jeou is leading Taiwan towardunification.
President Mas role as the KMT Party Chairman
(The survey was conducted on June 10 with sample size 708 and
sampling error about 3.76% at 95% confidence level)
1. 59.1% oppose President Ma Ying-jeou also being the KMT party
chairman. 25% favor this development. Of the swing voters, 55%
oppose Ma concurrently being chair and president. 19% favor this
proposition. Even
pan-blue supporters have a higher percentage opposing Mas
Chairman position than agreeing (49%>44%).
2. 53.7% are not satisfied with President Ma Ying-jeou's
performance, with 39.4% satisfied. Of these, 88% of pan-green
supporters and 56% of the swing voters are not satisfied with the
performance of President Ma Ying-jeou.70% of pan-blue supporters
are satisfied, 28% were dissatisfied.
Employment and the Economy
(The survey was done on June 15-16 with sample size 1174 and
sampling error about 2.9at 95% confidence level)1. Our survey
indicated that the June unemployment rate is 11.54%, i.e. 1.46
million people are currently
unemployed.
2. Those stuck in long-term unemployment (those seeking jobs for
over a year or have been unemployed for thatperiod of time) make up
over half of those unemployed. As the overall unemployment time
extends in duration
and moves towards long-term unemployment, short-term
unemployment has become a long-term problem in
society.
3. District-wise, central Taiwan has the highest unemployment
rate within the island (12.99%).4. Unemployment among white-collar
workers has slowed, but unemployment among blue-collar workers
has
worsened.
5. 44% of the respondents believe that the current unemployment
situation has worsened compared to the end oflast year, 35% believe
it has improved and 12% said there is no difference.
-
8/7/2019 DPP Newsletter June2009
12/12
12
6. 4% of the respondents felt that the governments last minute
efforts to slow unemployment and to save theeconomy werevery
effective, whereas 48% felt they wereslightly effective, 18%
believed they werenot very effective and 22% believed they
werecompletely ineffective.
7. 63% of the respondents felt that the governments current
economic policies are very short-sighted, whereas23% believe they
have long-term benefits.