|
EDITORIAL: Monitoring
has been the norm
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has
accused intelligence agencies of gathering information about the movements of
opposition presidential candidates and, consequently, interfering with the
election. Appearances do suggest there are grounds for the accusations. The
Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau (MJIB) operates the “An-Ping-Shun
Project,” recording candidates’ movements and, in this case, Tsai’s in
particular. It does seem serious, with both political and legal implications,
and is not something the government can brush aside with a simple denial.
Anybody with even a passing familiarity with Taiwanese politics knows
intelligence agencies gather information on opposition candidates. They would be
astounded if this didn’t happen. This has been a contentious issue in every
major poll since direct elections began in 1996. When former president Chen
Shui-bian (陳水扁) was in power, the then-opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
complained of being subjected to monitoring by the intelligence agencies.
In response to Tsai’s accusations, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that at no
point had he ordered the intelligence services to listen in on or gather
intelligence about other candidates, and neither the MJIB nor the National
Security Bureau (NSB) is targeting any particular party or individual; they are
merely working to ensure the safety of each candidate. There is no suggestion
that Tsai is being singled out.
It sounds like Ma, the NSB and the MJIB are just doing what the law requires
them to do. Things become a little murkier on closer inspection, however. Yes,
it is true that neither the NSB nor MJIB is monitoring or gathering intelligence
on any particular party or individual. As part of their daily reports on the
political situation, however, they collect information on all parties and
individuals and the resultant reports are sent directly to the Presidential
Office for the president’s eyes only. That is why any opposition party will
always rail against being monitored by the intelligence services: It gives the
incumbent president an unfair advantage. Ma says that at no point did he give
the command for intelligence to be gathered, but that is simply because this has
been a routine task for the NSB and MJIB for decades now, something for which
they need no specific directive from on high.
Ma may not have asked the intelligence agencies to do this, but the heads of
these agencies were appointed by the president and election time is a perfect
opportunity for them to demonstrate their loyalty and score brownie points. It’s
quite normal for them to report to the president on the election. These heads
are quite aware of how Ma likes to operate, however, so they won’t go directly
to him with the information, they will pass it on through intermediaries,
through his aides and the people around him. Ma himself may well have access to
the intelligence, but he won’t know the exact source. It’s also possible that
his aides will not pass it on to him at all, acting on it themselves, depending
on the situation. This still puts opponents at a distinct disadvantage and
forces them to compete on an uneven playing field.
The 2005 National Intelligence Services Act (國家情報工作法) states that intelligence
agencies must exercise political neutrality, submit to the oversight of the
Legislative Yuan and not interfere in political affairs. If one of the agencies
is found to have favored the incumbent and targeted an opposition candidate, the
head of that agency would be deemed to have broken the law and could be
prosecuted. There is already a precedent in Taiwan for the head of an
intelligence agency being imprisoned for such an offense.
Watergate was an important US political and legal milestone, one that made
people realize that however powerful the US president is, the rule of law,
fairness and honesty take precedent over electoral results and power. Hopefully
Ma will show himself to be a true statesman and order a special inquiry, to draw
a line under illegal and unfair practices in this election.
|
