TAHR slams Ma over rights abuses
　

TOP 10 VIOLATIONS: The rights association said that instead of exporting Taiwanese democracy to China, the government has imported Chinese repression
　

By Jenny W. Hsu
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 1

“Even Ma once vowed to give the streets back to the people, but the reality is the government still asserts power over protesters.” — Lin Chia-fan, TAHR deputy chairperson

The suppression by police of protests during last month's visit by a Chinese official topped this year's top 10 human rights violations, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR) said yesterday, urging the government to stop sabotaging the nation's hard won democracy by promptly amending the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法).

“President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said he wants to export Taiwan's democracy to China. Instead, the government has imported the Chinese government's oppressive tactics into Taiwan,” TAHR deputy chairperson Lin Chia-fan (林佳範) said, slamming Ma for lacking credibility.

Official figures showed that more than 100 protesters and police officers were injured in clashes last month during several demonstrations against the visit by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林).

During Chen's five-day visit, there were reports of unwarranted police searches, police ripping Republic of China flags from people's hands, apprehending people for waving the flags and a record store being shut down for playing a pro-Taiwan song.

While the pan-green camp and human rights groups, including Freedom House and Amnesty International, panned the government for denying the public freedom of expression, the administration insisted it had done nothing wrong, dubbing the demonstrators “lawless mobs and vigilantes.”

Foreign academics, including former American Institute in Taiwan director Nat Bellocchi and Ma's Harvard professor Jerome Cohen, have called on Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) to establish a fair and impartial judicial system as a number of former Democratic Progressive Party leaders, including former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), have been detained on suspicion of corruption.

Judicial Reform Foundation executive director Lin Feng-cheng (林峰正) said the mistreatment of these detainees exemplified government abuse of human rights.

Lin said that in Taiwan, the accused do not enjoy full client and lawyer confidentiality because their conversations while in detention are recorded.

No defendant would feel comfortable disclosing all the details to his counsel for fear of incriminating himself in court, Lin said.

Other rights violations on the list include the coerced relocation of two Aboriginal tribes from their homeland to make room for public infrastructure construction projects, the forced closure of the Losheng Sanatorium to accommodate the expansion of an MRT line and the widening of the legal parameters for law enforcement officials to collect DNA samples from suspects.

A prompt amendment to the assembly law is the only answer to Ma's plummeting approval ratings, Lin Chia-fan said.

“Martial law has been lifted for more than 20 years. The Assembly and Parade Law has also been denounced as unconstitutional. Even Ma once vowed to give the streets back to the people, but the reality is the government still asserts power over protesters,” he said.

In a true democracy, he said, individuals are guaranteed freedom of assembly and should not have to seek police permission to stage a public protest.

He also criticized the amendment proposed by the Cabinet after a month-long sit-in protest by students demanding changes to the law, saying it was a “laughingstock” because the draft only varied in word, but not in content.

KMT Dalai Lama tactics slammed
　

REVERSAL OF SUPPORT: Last week at a meeting with foreign press, President Ma said the timing was not appropriate for a visit from the Nobel Peace laureate

STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 2

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) yesterday accused the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) of being dishonest after a DPP-proposed resolution inviting the Dalai Lama to speak at the legislature passed the Procedure Committee but was put low on the agenda for Friday’s plenary session.

DPP Legislator Tsai Huang-liang (蔡煌瑯) said he suspected KMT lawmakers of purposely placing the item at the bottom of the agenda in the hope it would be scrapped on a technicality.

Tsai said the KMT wanted to appear to welcome the resolution, but did not want the Dalai Lama to visit.

“They want to save face but they also plan to axe the resolution,” he said.

Last week at a meeting with foreign press, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said the timing was not appropriate for a visit from the Nobel Peace laureate and Tibetan spiritual leader. His comment marked a reversal of the support he voiced for the Tibetan movement during his presidential campaign earlier this year, when he also said he hoped the Dalai Lama would come to Taiwan.

Friday’s plenary session has 12 items on the agenda so far, including the Cabinet’s consumer voucher plan and matters related to the Election and Recall Law and public television.

Meanwhile, Kaohsiung County Commissioner Yang Chiu-hsing (楊秋興) joined Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) and the DPP in welcoming the Dalai Lama to visit.

“The majority of Taiwanese support [the] Dalai [Lama] visiting. We are studying the possibility of inviting world religious leaders, including [the] Dalai [Lama], to attend an interfaith religious exchange that could be called the ‘religious United Nations,’” he said at a meeting of the county government.

DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) also welcomed a visit by the Dalai Lama.

“The Dalai Lama is a courageous and respectful leader as well as a symbol of hope, freedom and human rights in Tibet. He has fought for the freedom of Tibet and raised world awareness and concerns about the difficulties and challenges facing Tibet today. He is a world-respected religious and political leader,” Tsai said in a statement.

“If the Dalai Lama thinks my invitation ... appropriate, it would be a pleasure for me and the DPP to invite him,” the statement said.

Activists express hopes for an independent Tibet
　

CAMPAIGN: Tenzin Dorjee said that while many in Tibet wanted to resist the Chinese, their government told them that being ‘nice’ was the right thing to do
　

By Loa Iok-sin
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 2

Although they have never set foot on Tibetan soil, Canadian-born Students for a Free Tibet (SFT) executive director Lhadon Tethong and Indian-born deputy executive director Tenzin Dorjee shared their dream of an independent Tibet and views on some current issues in Taiwan during an interview with the Taipei Times yesterday.

“I consider myself a Tibetan and a Canadian both at the same time,” Lhadon said, while sitting in a meeting room at Fujen Catholic University (FJU) before delivering a speech with Tenzin about Tibetan history and the Tibetan struggle to gain independence from China to a group of FJU students yesterday afternoon.

In fact, the FJU was the sixth university that Lhadon and Tzenzin have spoken at since their arrival in Taiwan last Wednesday, and there are two to three more universities to come in their schedule.

Lhadon’s father was a Tibetan refugee in India, while her mother was a Canadian who worked at Tibetan refugee camps in India for 12 years.

Although Lhadon was born and raised in Canada and barely speaks Tibetan, she can understand it and still has a strong sense of Tibetan identity.

“My feelings for Tibet are very strong — although we’re far apart,” Lhadon said. “My inspiration came from [the story of] our parents and story of our people, and for a large part, from the Dalai Lama.”

AMONG TIBETANS

Lhadon said that she grew up among Tibetans in Canada, listening to stories of elders in the community who had lived under Chinese rule.

“Since I was little, I have been going to March 10 rallies, shouting ‘free Tibet,’ and when I wrote essays and papers at school, I wrote about the Tibet issue — so [supporting the Tibetan cause] became naturally just part of us,” she said.

Later in life, Lhadon grabbed every possible opportunity to attend speeches by the Dalai Lama whenever he visited North America.

“His messages are about love and peace, but they are so strong,” she said.

She became an activist after leaving home for college in the small city of Halifax, Nova Scotia in eastern Canada, where the majority of the people were Caucasians who didn’t know much about the Tibet issue.

“The people there [in Halifax] knew little to nothing about Tibet, so I felt it was my duty to start a chapter [of the SFT] there,” Lhadon said.

Hence, with a few classmates, Lhadon began to organize candlelit vigils or film festivals about Tibet.

“It’s quite challenging to put yourself out there for something as important as the Tibet issue in a foreign community,” she said. “But I told myself: ‘you have to do this’ — and gladly, people were friendly and open-minded about the issue.”

SIMILAR SITUATION

Tenzin, who was born and raised in Dharamsala, India — the seat of the Tibetan government in-exile — before moving to the US at the age of 18 to attend college, experienced a similar situation.

“It was difficult at first,” Tenzin said. “First, in India, everybody thinks the same way, but it’s not the case in the US. I was not able to fully express myself in English, and I was brought up in a more conservative culture in which people are less encouraged to speak out.”

But once Tenzin took the initial step, he found it surprisingly rewarding.

“Although it’s more challenging to campaign for the Tibetan cause in the US, it’s actually more inspiring — it’s good to see people from different countries getting together for the same cause,” he said.

“I would say I’m being a little selfish when I’m in it, because I’m a Tibetan, but when I saw people who are not Tibetans also in the movement, I know they’re showing the bright side of human beings,” Tenzin added.

MA COMMENT

When asked to comment on President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recent remark that the timing is not appropriate for the Dalai Lama to visit Taiwan at the moment, Tenzin said he felt sad.

“I don’t feel sad for the Dalai Lama, but I feel sad for my friends in Taiwan — it deprives them of the freedom of religion, and their right to learn from the Dalai Lama,” he said. “I’m a Buddhist, and I know how it feels.”

Tenzin then added that the incident shows that “the dictatorship in China not only undermines the freedom for Tibetans in Tibet, but also freedom in other countries.”

He also warned the Taiwanese to be cautious when developing a relationship with China.

He said that while many Tibetans insisted on resisting Chinese invasion in the late 1940s and early 1950s, the Tibetan government at the time tried to convince the people that “if we’re nice to the Chinese, they would be nice to us as well” and some even suggested that working with the Chinese could improve the economy in Tibet.

“For a little gain, we’ve lost the entire economy; to appease the powerful neighbor, we’ve plunged into the greatest tragedy,” Tenzin said.

“We learned a bitter and harsh lesson. We don’t want our tragedy to happen to anyone else. We don’t want that to happen to the Taiwanese people,” he said. “Absolutely do not trust [the Chinese].”

Documentary on brutality during Chen visit released
　

By Rich Chang
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 2
　

A pro-independence organization yesterday released a documentary recounting how the police used excessive force to block people from expressing their opinions and protesting during the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), and said the documentary would be delivered to several international human rights organizations in the hope they would pay more attention to Taiwan’s human rights situation.

“By producing the documentary, we hope to draw the attention of international society [to the fact] that human rights in Taiwan have been seriously violated and democracy has been jeopardized during President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration,” Secretary-General of the Taiwan Society Lo Chih-cheng (羅致政) told a press conference yesterday.

The documentary was shown during the press conference. The film contained footage of national flags being taken from people carrying or waving them by police officers, police pushing protesters and people injured in clashes with police officers, and police officers rushing into a record store and forcing it to close while it was playing a patriotic Taiwanese song.

International human rights worker Lynn Miles said that Taiwan had been a free country.

Foreigners who visited Taiwan usually felt it was freer than many other countries. But Taiwan’s human rights were jeopardized during the Chen incident, Miles said.

He said as a human rights worker living in Taiwan for many years, he could not believe what happened during Chen’s visit.

Former Government Information Office (GIO) minister Shieh Jhy-wey (謝志偉) said Ma was schooled in the authoritarian tactics of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), and that he never really understood the ideas of human rights and democracy. Ma had done nothing in his life to promote human rights or democracy, Shieh added.

The Ma administration’s alleged misuse of the Taiwanese justice system and police to undermine human rights have drawn international criticism in recent weeks.

Freedom House — the US-based pro-Democracy group — has called for an independent investigation into violent clashes between police and activists protesting the visit to Taiwan by Chen.

The International Federation for Human Rights has also charged that arrests and violence during the visit were “grave violations of human rights under the pretext of national security,” and a substantial number of foreign experts on Taiwan called for reform in two open letters published by the Taipei Times.

Amnesty International called for the Control Yuan to conduct an independent inquiry into alleged excessive police force during the protests last month.

Human rights advocates air concerns
　

DEJA VU: Threats to civil liberties and freedom of the press as well as pretrial detentions of opposition figures have led some to feel they are back in the Martial Law era
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 3
　

On Dec. 10, 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Sixty years later, Taiwan prides itself on its peaceful democratization. However, many human rights and media watchdogs, both local and international, have expressed concerns over an increase in human rights violations and restrictions on civil liberties since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office in May.

RESTRICTIONS ON CIVIL LIBERTIES

Freedom House has called for an independent investigation into the violent clashes between the police and protesters during the visit of Chinese cross-strait negotiator Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) early last month.

Amnesty International has asked that the Control Yuan address the serious concerns raised by civil society in Taiwan and that the Ma administration end the practice of using the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) to deny freedom of assembly.

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) has expressed deep concern over the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during Chen’s visit, describing such arrests and violence as “grave violations of human rights, under the pretext of national security.”

The FIDH has requested that the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau be held responsible for violating their legal obligations.

The FIDH has also called on the Ma administration to amend the Assembly and Parade Law, saying it is “a legacy of the martial law era.”

In particular, the group has asked the government to abolish the requirement for mandatory permits and instead adopt a system of voluntary reporting.

It also says that the clause that restricts assemblies from being held in certain areas gives the authorities too much discretion to restrict people’s freedom of association and freedom of expression.

Lin Chia-fan (林佳範), deputy chairman of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, said the draft amendments to the Assembly and Parade Law proposed by the administration were far from perfect and his association would continue to push for more relaxed legislation.

The Executive Yuan last week approved amendments to the law that would remove the power to grant or deny protest permits from the police, but would offer them new powers to bar or alter demonstration plans in certain cases.

Lin berated the administration for taking drastic and unnecessary measures during Chen’s visit, including clearing highway lanes by force, confiscating and damaging private property and restricting the freedom of citizens’ movement.

While the police should remain politically neutral and serve the interests of the people, Lin said citizens were restricted from displaying or carrying the national flag and peacefully expressing their opinions.

“It is like we are reliving the Martial Law era,” he said. “Those who carry China’s five-star flag were left alone, but those carrying the Republic of China’s flag were harassed and even attacked. It is outright suppression of personal freedom and only shows degradation of human rights.”

Lin said Ma could have turned the demonstrations to his advantage and used them as a bargaining chip with Chen, but he decided to stand together with Chen and suppress the Taiwanese.

As the Ma administration did not respond positively to the demands of the Wild Strawberry Student Movement, students decided on Sunday to leave the Liberty Square where they staged the sit-in, he said.

Lin said that the students could learn one lesson from the month-long demonstration: A one-party government can get away with almost anything if there is no powerful opposition in place to serve as an effective check-and-balance.

“But the protest is far from over,” Lin said. “The students have started the fire and now they are spreading it. When there comes a day for them to return to the streets, they will quickly reassemble.”

SUPPRESSION OF PRESS FREEDOM

In addition to suppressing freedom of expression of citizens, journalists covering the demonstrations were assaulted and some photojournalists were pressured to help find potential suspects in the rallies during Chen’s visit.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has expressed deep concern over the detention of an independent documentary filmmaker for filming Chen in a hotel, and the assault of a television reporter by police who reportedly mistook him for a protester during the Nov. 16 rally.

In addition, the IFJ condemned the Ma administration for “apparent interference in state-owned media” and urged government authorities to refrain from intervening in personnel decisions, operations and news coverage of media outlets as doing so could jeopardize editorial independence.

The Association of Taiwan Journalists (ATJ) has denounced the restrictions and violent treatment of journalists and civilians during the protests.

The ATJ described the government’s clamp down on the media’s right to report as a “media restraint equivalent to that seen in an authoritarian regime,” saying that it seriously sabotaged Taiwan’s image as a country with free press.

ATJ chairman Leon Chuang (莊豐嘉) said that he suspected the recent slew of incidents would have a negative impact on Taiwan’s ranking of press freedom next year.

Chuang said he felt like Taiwanese society had regressed 20 years to the Martial Law era.

Back then, the KMT government was worried about the negative image martial law would bring to the country, Chuang said, but now the KMT administration does not seem to care much about public opinion.

“For a long time, Taiwan did not need to ask the international community for help in terms of human rights violations because the opposition and the local media were powerful enough to keep the government in check,” he said. “But now, things seem to have changed.”

The pressure exerted by international organizations, therefore, played a pivotal role in restraining the KMT government, Chuang said.

FLAWED JUDICIAL PROCEDURES

The rights of individuals before the law has also became an issue. A substantial number of foreign experts on Taiwan have expressed their deep concern about the recent series of detentions of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) politicians and urged reform in two open letters published by the Taipei Times.

They criticized the pretrial detentions as a “severe contravention of the writ of habeas corpus and a basic violation of due process, justice and the rule of law.”

They also pointed out that prosecutor’s offices “evidently leak detrimental information to the press” and this kind of “trial by press” is a violation of the basic standards of judicial procedures.

Lin Feng-cheng (林峰正), president of the Judicial Reform Foundation, said that although pretrial custody is legal in Taiwan, the damage done to the detainee’s reputation during the incarceration is difficult to restore even if the person was later proven innocent.

Lin proposed that the maximum time the accused may be detained for the purpose of investigation be reduced from four months to 20 days, as in Japan.

Such a reduction would give adequate protection to the rights of the accused while still providing reasonable time for a criminal investigation, he said.

“It would compel police and prosecutors to collect solid evidence before requesting detention,” he said. “It would make them think twice before detaining the suspect because once the 20 days are up, they must either indict or release the suspect.”

However, police and prosecutors seem to be convinced that pretrial custody is the best way to expedite indictments, Lin said, adding that some prosecutors even said they used pretrial detention as a tool to “teach the detainee a lesson.”

“It serves as a form of punishment because the living conditions at the detention center are awful,” Lin said. “Some of the inhumane treatment includes having their head shaved and being denied a hot shower for several days during the winter.”

Lin also urged the administration to establish a protocol for law enforcement personnel that would take human rights into consideration before a suspect was handcuffed.

Taiwan Foundation for Democracy honors Sima Samar
　

By Shih Hsiu-chuan
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 3
　

The Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) will today honor Sima Samar, chairwoman of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, with its 2008 Asia Democracy and Human Rights Award for her dedication to improving the status of women in Afghanistan. As well as the award, Samar will receive a US$100,000 grant.

Living in countries where women have long been denied education and health care, it is through perseverance that Sima Samar stays the course to assist people in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and now in war-torn Sudan.

“It’s really difficult, but I didn’t give up. I stand by my principles and beliefs because I think that nobody would give you rights as a gift, you have to earn it,” said Samar, internationally recognized for her devotion to human rights, especially on behalf of Afghan women.

Born in 1957, Samar is the first woman from the Hazara minority — a persecuted ethnic minority in Afghanistan — to obtain a medical degree. She graduated from Kabul University in 1982, when the country was under Russian control following the 1979 invasion.

After graduation, she practiced medicine at a government hospital in Kabul and provided treatment to patients in remote areas of central Afghanistan.

She defied her father’s demand that she return home and accept another arranged marriage after her first husband disappeared in 1984 following his arrest by the communist regime. She instead fled to Pakistan to work with Afghan refugees facing a dire lack of medical and education resources, particularly women forbidden to see male doctors or attend school.

The Afghan physician said she decided early on to fight for women’s rights and equality as she experienced discrimination as a woman in her family and also in school when she was young, prompting her to “study hard to go to college” and become “more or less tough on my work.”

“And honestly, the pressure on me, it is hard to resist. At one time it was really hard. They really wanted to kill … and it was very difficult time, but I did resist. Because I thought, if I give up, then they will repress others very soon, quickly,” she said.

She returned to Afghanistan in December 2001 to become the deputy prime minister and minister of women’s affairs for the interim administration after the removal of the Taliban regime, being one of only two women Cabinet ministers in the transition government.

Samar was appointed to the most senior position ever held by a woman in Afghanistan, but her political career was cut short in June 2002 when she was accused of questioning Islam, especially Shariah Law, following an interview in Canada with a Persian-language newspaper. Samar said she was misquoted.

“What I said was I don’t believe in the Taliban style of Shariah, which is the misinterpretation of free Islam. [The newspaper] misquoted me that I don’t believe in Shariah Law … But, that [the interview] was just a reason. It was all because that I kept calling for justice and they didn’t like it,” she said.

Then-interim leader Hamid Karzai, who was elected president in 2004, told Samar she must move to either lead the foreign affairs ministry or the human rights commission after a group of people at an assembly, or Loya Jirga, shouted “we don’t want her. She is not Muslim.”

Samar accepted the position of chairperson of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission in July 2002. There, Samar continued to oversee human rights education programs across the country, implement a nationwide program on women’s rights, monitor and investigate human rights abuses and advocate for transitional justice.

As she pursued human rights for all, Samar put her and her family members’ lives at immense risk, facing continuous death threats until now, but she remains undeterred.

“It’s not an easy life. But as I said, that as a human being, you would die one day anyway. So if you die for something positive, it’s much better,” Samar said.

Samar said that she just “ignored” the threats from different groups of fundamentalists most of the time but she did try to be more cautious about her safety “because I really want to continue my work on educating people, and especially the girls.”

“If girls are educated, they will understand what’s their rights, and they will fight for their rights. Without half of the population not being educated, we can not move the society forward,” she said.

Under Samar’s leadership, the Shuhada Organization, founded in 1989, now operates twelve clinics and four hospitals in Afghanistan and Pakistan, as well as 71 schools in Afghanistan and three schools for Afghan refugees in Quetta, Pakistan, educating over 48,000 girls and boys.

Believing that education is “the main tool to change the mentalities and the whole behaviors within the society,” Samar said that if people were educated, the war in Afghanistan would not have lasted so long, Islam would not have been misused and there wouldn’t be suicide attacks.

“Educated people will not accept what the political leaders preach and used by them under the name of Islam and jihad,” she said. “The problem in Afghanistan is lack of education.”

Samar said the situation in Afghanistan has improved since 2001 as the new Constitution includes an equal-rights provision for women and girls now comprise 30 percent to 35 percent of the total number of students enrolled in school, which was not the case during the Taliban.

However, there is still a long road ahead, she said.

“For the women to be able to exert their rights, the Constitution should become reality, not in the paper. There aren’t enough school facilities, books and trained teachers. A lot of women still do not have access to health care. And the security situation is getting worse,” Samar said.

“Some of the districts are still under the control of Taliban where children, especially girls, can not go to school, health service is not in very good shape, and most of the non-governmental organizations [NGOs] can not go to the areas because of the kidnapping problem. There is lack of law enforcement. On top of these, suicide attacks stop people on the roads and intimidate the people,” she said.

In 2005, Samar was appointed as the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights for Sudan, extending her efforts for human rights to another country facing a difficult situation.

Citing what happened in Afghanistan when the Russians left in 1992 as an example, Samar said that neither isolation nor sanction could help a country.

“At that time when the pro-Russian government continued to be in power until 1992 and when the mujahedeen government was formed in Pakistan and Central Afghanistan, the whole international community left Afghanistan, including the NGOs. Afghanistan became isolated, a training ground for terrorists and a place of opium production,” she said.

“Supporting human rights is the responsibility of every person,” Samar said.

Asked about President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recent remarks that Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama is not welcome to visit Taiwan at this time, Samar said she was not able to comment on that because she was traveling and didn’t know the details.

“I would have commented on that if I knew the whole background of the story,” she said, but she restated her belief that it’s everybody’s responsibility to promote human rights.

Samar, who has received numerous awards for advocating human rights, suggested that young people not familiar with countries like Afghanistan and Sudan get to know them through reading, traveling or volunteering for NGOs in the countries.

“Young people in Taiwan or in Afghanistan or in any other parts of the world are the owners of this world, the futures of this world. They have to be more respect for human rights and human dignity so they will be more responsible for a peaceful future for this planet,” she said.

A day to reflect on past and present

Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 8

Today, on International Human Rights Day, groups will hold vigils and celebrations around the globe to mark 60 years since the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

It is a day to pause and appreciate the freedoms we have, note the progress we have made since the Martial Law-era and remember those who live or lived under oppression.

In Hong Kong on Sunday, members of Independent PEN took to the streets early, calling for the principles of the UDHR to be respected and for China to release around 50 writers known to be imprisoned because of the words they dared to air.

That is a call protesters could hardly have made in communist China without risking detention themselves. Six decades after the UDHR’s inception, the principles enshrined in it — as well as in the UN human rights conventions that Beijing has since signed — carry little or no weight with Chinese authorities.

Last week, reports emerged that China had launched another of its infamous “strike hard” campaigns, this time to renew its stranglehold on a media environment that it thinks is getting out of hand. While the campaign will apparently target the domestic media to ensure that reports do not fuel the country’s swelling social unrest, the foreign press can hardly hope for better treatment.

News of the campaign followed on the heels of two reports at the end of last month that Chinese authorities violated the lofty freedoms they promised foreign journalists during the Summer Olympics — a set of relaxed guidelines that Beijing reaffirmed after the Games ended.

On Nov. 28, a British correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor was detained while covering a story about one of China’s countless underground churches — considered a scourge by Beijing despite its repeated assertions that it respects freedom of religion. Peter Ford was taken to an airport in Henan Province and sent back to Beijing immediately after being questioned for three hours, Reporters without Borders said.

Even more disturbing were reports that a Belgian TV crew were assaulted a day earlier for covering treatment of AIDS patients — also in Henan Province. The crew said they were pulled from their car, their videotapes and reporters’ notes taken and that they were beaten up.

The attack would hardly be the first on a journalist in China, where at least 10 foreign reporters were roughed up during the Olympics. It is not known how many domestic media workers might regularly meet such harassment. But the news was particularly symbolic of Beijing’s well-documented hypocrisy on matters of human rights, as it came just three days before World AIDS Day. To mark that day, Dec. 1, China held events designed to remake its notorious image as a regime that discriminates against AIDS patients and brutally represses open dialogue on the spread of the disease within its borders.

Every human being is entitled to the rights set forth in the UDHR. Unfortunately, the world remains a place where those rights must be fought for. As Taiwan again finds itself in a disquieting position in which the government must be reminded of its duties to respect rights that the nation had only recently begun to take for granted, we would do well to reflect on the harsh reality in neighboring countries and refocus our eyes on the goal.

Rethinking our economic fantasies
　

By Lai Shih-kung 賴世剛
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 8

The onslaught of the US subprime mortgage crisis last year led to a series of shocks to the global economy, including the collapse of major financial institutions. That in turn caused a global financial crisis that has seen central banks around the world working together to save their stock markets.

These events have also seen Asian currencies devaluate rapidly and lead to rising unemployment in Taiwan.

This illustrates that economic problems are never isolated and that one problem can have significant effects on other sectors of the economy.

This series of events has forced economists to give serious thought to the pros and cons of capitalism.

The theoretical basis of capitalism is basically derived from Scottish economist Adam Smith’s theory of the “invisible hand,” which argued that the market would achieve equilibrium through trade between manufacturers and consumers, which would then help create reasonable, balanced prices and balanced production and consumption. This would lead to a more efficient distribution of resources, Smith said.

The equilibrium theory has long been the center of neo-classical economic theory. This theory, however, is based on assumptions from an imaginary world — not the real world.

The theory assumes that decision makers are shortsighted, yet capable of everything. It also assumes that decisions are independent, do not cost anything and that the world is simple and linear in nature.

However, the evidence clearly shows that in the real world, decision makers have foresight but are limited at the same time by rational thinking.

Decisions are not independent but interrelated and they have a cost. The world is complex and non-linear in nature and equilibrium is something that cannot be forced.

Under these circumstances, leaving the market to itself can result in disaster. Government planning and action are necessary to rectify problems as they arise.

The global financial crisis has revealed the basis of the theory of equilibrium to be fantasy.

To handle the economic crisis, the government should take a more active planning role. It should not try to draw up one complete and miraculous plan to solve all problems, but should seek a set of flexible measures for different problems such as the job market, the stock market and the real estate market and assimilate its plans with the projects of various governmental departments and the private sector to ensure appropriate action.

This is the only way the government will be able to solve the problems troubling the economy.

Using fantasy theories to try to solve real-world problems is as futile as the economic theory of equilibrium is unrealistic.

Lai Shih-kung is a professor in the Department of Real Estate and Built Environment of the College of Public Affairs at National Taipei University.
　

China: threat or economic savior?
　

By Wu Jieh-min 吳介民
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 8

Last month’s visit by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) sparked conflicts within Taiwan that have not dissipated. Chen’s visit highlighted sharp differences in the public’s views of China as well.

One view focuses on the opportunity and benefits that China may represent. Some believe that China’s yearly GDP growth of 10 percent, its accumulation of US$2 trillion in foreign reserves and the potential buying power of its economy will be the saviors of the global economic recession. According to this view, closer links with China will bring Taiwan a prosperous future and China is seen as the nation’s only hope.

This theory is based on the unstated hypothesis that political responsibility, democracy and human rights can be sacrificed for economic growth — up to an “appropriate” extent.

This has been facilitated by the negotiations between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Agreements reached via the party-to-party platform are then ratified by the Straits Exchange Foundation and ARATS and put into effect by the governments of Taiwan and China.

Taiwan is a democracy, but the KMT-CCP communication platform is non-transparent and has managed to escape monitoring of the legislature and civil society.

However, for monopolistic business groups, the platform is very effective and direct cross-strait flights and other special privileges are decided behind closed doors, which is more efficient than open negotiations.

But this view of China as an economic opportunity is incomplete. It considers problems from the viewpoint of capitalist groups and blindly sings the praises of economic development, while ignoring issues such as massive social costs, destruction of the environment and the exploitation of hundreds of millions of workers.

As China’s power increases, social inequality is increasing. Not long ago, Chinese political scientist Ding Xueliang (丁學良) said in the online version of the Chinese-language publication Financial News that the Chinese model should not be adopted in developing nations precisely because the social costs are too high.

A second view of China focuses on the threats our neighbor may present.

Beijing’s bullying of Taiwan has not eased, despite Taipei’s gestures of goodwill. China has taken various steps to oppress Taiwan. The “Anti-Secession” Law, the “one China” principle and the 1,000 missiles it has aimed at Taiwan are a few examples. If it establishes closer links with China, Taiwan will become a second Hong Kong and democracy will be a thing of the past.

China has had its eyes on Taiwan for a long time and it is a society full of risk, with the recent melamine-tainted milk scandal being a good example. China is unstable and at risk of collapsing, as exemplified by continuous protests and riots in Xinjiang and Tibet. With close economic links, Taiwan would risk suffering immensely if CCP rule collapsed.

This view is based on the hypothesis that Taiwan has always been a victim in its dealings with China, with money going into China and debt staying in Taiwan. But many Taiwanese businesspeople have found success in China and the cross-strait division of labor has indirectly helped upgrade industries in Taiwan.

In addition, hundreds of millions of peasant workers fuel the “world’s factory” — including joint ventures between China and Taiwan — and have therefore contributed to Taiwan’s economy.

But this view also has a blind spot: It ignores the changes that have taken place in China and the state of Chinese society.

After 30 years of developing a market economy, China is no longer truly communist but is moving toward bureaucratic capitalism. The irony is that the KMT, with its anti-communist history, has long been friendly to the CCP, while the Taiwanese public’s fears of “Red China” are still fed by decades of the KMT’s anti-communist propaganda.

Although China is strictly controlled by the state, many NGOs are active in gray areas where the state cannot supervise and control them. Protesters in China no longer protest in the name of “class struggle” — they use creative and imaginative terms to package their activities.

For example, some people use the term “take a stroll” to refer to street protests, while others use the term “visit” to mean surrounding a government office. This is reminiscent of the way street protests were called “self-help movements” 20 or so years ago in Taiwan.

The two above-mentioned views of China, while very different, have one thing in common: Both lack social perspective.

Taiwan’s understanding of China should be based on progressive values and careful analysis of social issues. I would like to propose that with the rise of China’s economy, China is no longer a backward country and the CCP is no longer a totalitarian party, but an authoritarian party characterized by resilient and flexible rule.

Various social groups are emerging in China and Taiwanese people comprise one of these. The market economy has made China wealthier, but has also aggravated social inequalities. The ways in which China uses its state apparatus to control society are becoming more technological and subtle, while diversity and social protest become more common.

There is a great deal of truth behind the threats that China represents, but the image of the “Red Terror” has been exaggerated.

Cross-strait exchanges should not be monopolized by two political parties that only represent political and business interests. The KMT-CCP talks are an anti-democratic platform for secret party diplomacy. They serve business groups and represent a private club for the ruling elite and high ranking officials and business leaders whose prime concern is money and power. The agenda they set covers up and crowds out serious social problems.

Apart from the KMT-CCP platform, we need something along the lines of a cross-strait civil society platform to promote open and democratic dialogue. Taiwan should engage China’s cultural and academic circles as well as civic groups to help Chinese better understand Taiwan. This would also help both sides share their experiences fighting to survive in societies characterized by decades of dictatorship.

It is worth thinking about what inspiration the negative and positive experiences we gained through democratic transformation can give China’s awakening civil society — and how progressive circles from both sides of the Strait can combine their efforts and fight right-wing influences in our societies.

The establishment of a cross-strait civil society platform would not only help protect the nation’s democracy, it could help encourage China to think about what social values it has sacrificed in its quest to become a wealthy and strong nation.

Wu Jieh-min is an associate professor of sociology and a member of the executive committee at the Center for Contemporary China at National Tsing Hua University.
　

A reflection of the state of Taiwan in its arts
　

By Paul Lin 林保華
Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008, Page 8

It has been an eventful autumn for Taiwan. In addition to concerns over the economy and deteriorating living standards, it is worrying to see that aspects of Taiwanese consciousness are being washed away.

Because of this, the awakening of Taiwanese culture seems to be filling in the gap left by the disappearance of the political manifestation of Taiwanese consciousness.

The films Cape No. 7 (海角七號) and 1895 have been successes not only because they were produced locally, but because the movies are products of Taiwanese culture.

The Chinese government’s abrupt decision not to allow Cape No. 7 to be screened in China reveals the hypocrisy of statements made by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), because it shows the desire to keep the Chinese public from getting to know Taiwanese culture and history.

And while the movie 1895 is shown in Taiwanese theaters, China Central Television aired a Chinese historical drama called Taiwan 1895. The drama elicited widespread criticism on the Internet for a confusing storyline that misrepresents history. This is because China emphasizes politics, while history plays an insignificant role.

I moved to Taiwan more than two years ago and have spent that time trying to improve my understanding of it not only from a political perspective, but also from a cultural and historical perspective. These two movies enhanced my knowledge of Taiwan in terms of its history and art. In August, I saw a performance by the Taipei Royal Ballet based on the poem The Corsair by the English poet Lord Byron. I did not expect Taiwan would have such a top-notch ballet company. If it were based in Hong Kong, it would have been famous long ago.

The first time I heard of Tsai Jui-yueh (蔡瑞月) was two years ago when then-Taipei mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — in an attempt to redeem himself after allegations he abused his mayoral special affairs fund — donated money he had transferred to his private bank account during his mayoral terms to the Tsai Jui-yueh Dance Foundation and other foundations. Ma’s move was an attempt to reduce the case’s impact on his image and to show his loyalty to Taiwan.

The hardship Tsai experienced during the White Terror has shaped her Taiwanese consciousness. At first I thought her dance troupe’s performances would be pro-localization, but they were not. Because of her experiences living in Japan and Australia and her devotion to the dance industry in Taiwan, she has been called “the mother of Taiwanese modern dance.”

The Tsai Jui-yueh Dance Festival took place in October, covering works by Tsai and other choreographers. Songs without Words (無言歌), Bones of the Warriors (勇士骨) and The Lament of Foreign Brides (外籍新娘悲歌) concern human rights issues such as the 228 Incident and reflect modern Taiwan.

Radeau, Limousine for Janis and Brandenburg Concertos were other pieces by international choreographers performed at the festival. Although Tsai passed away in 2005, her successors and many young dancers strive to promote her tradition while innovating.

As for the Rose Monument, where the Tsai Jui-yueh Dance Institution is located along with a restaurant, this must be what is meant by cultural activities supported by industry.

Sitting on a green lawn outdoors while watching a performance is a unique pleasure. The venue has been reborn after several fires. Likewise, perhaps this eventful and disaster-stricken country can become a new nation that embodies the spirit of tolerance and modernity of Tsai’s dances.

Paul Lin is a political commentator based in Taiwan.