|
Martial law mindset
remains in government
By Liu Ching-Yi 劉靜怡
The arrest of Taipei Society (澄社) member Hsu Shih-jung (徐世榮) during protests
against the demolition of houses in Dapu Borough (大埔) in Miaoli County’s Jhunan
Township (竹南) last month has led to controversy after controversy.
It was neither the first nor the last time that someone was arrested for
shouting slogans while President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was present, nor was it even
unexpected, and perhaps Hsu’s arrest received more attention because he is a
professor.
However, the fact remains that while Taiwan may have been lavished with praise
for its democratization over the past 20 years, what this incident tells us is
that, as far as the current legal system is concerned, street protests are still
treated as if martial law had never been lifted.
The Police Duties Enforcement Act (警察職權行使法) has been amended to expand the
rights of police to supervise street protests and, last year, the Special
Service Act (特種勤務條例) was amended to give the national security agencies special
service rights. The martial law-like treatment of street protests only adds to
these laws.
Not a lot of attention was paid when charges were unable to be brought against
the military police, who exceeded their powers, after protesters were injured in
demonstrations during the visit by then-Association for Relations Across the
Taiwan Straits chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) in 2008. However, with the help of pro
bono lawyers, Hsu is now filing charges against top-level police officials and
the head of the National Security Bureau rather than directing his charges
against low-level police officers.
In addition to highlighting the longstanding mistreatment of street protests by
prosecutors, police and national security, this also calls for further
consideration of the absurd implications of the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法)
that currently governs street protests.
In any normal democracy, assembly, demonstrations and the shouting of slogans
are the humble means left to disadvantaged groups that want to organize and make
their voice heard in society and to put pressure on the government. This is not
only about freedom of expression by shouting slogans and freedom of assembly by
way of organizing; in a democracy, these actions are also the public’s last
resort when they want to protest against the government. This is why constantly
charging people with offenses against public safety clearly amounts to applying
a martial law mindset to the handling of street protests.
In the same way, if, on one hand, the government is allowed to hold on to the
Assembly and Parade Act, a remnant of the Martial Law era, and use it to protect
itself or the relationship between it and industry, while on the other hand, it
continues to brainwash the public by stressing the need for social order, then
everyone will become captive to the government’s omnipresent ideology. We will
have to continue to be satisfied with the restricted freedom that comes as a
result of the Assembly and Parade Act, whose final goal is to restrict freedom.
Any time something runs counter to public interest or justice and we want to put
pressure on the government, we will have to rely on the hope that anyone who
initiates a protest will be able to mobilize sufficient numbers of protesters
while at the same time being able to meet various unreasonable demands when
applying for permission to hold an activity.
When we can no longer wait because public interest has been devastated and
justice destroyed, the absurd version of democracy that we are left with will
not be what you or I want.
Liu Ching-yi is a professor in the Graduate Institute of National Development
at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
|
