new constitution on Oct 07, 2004

Lee Teng-hui to give speech on new constitution

By Jewel Huang
STAFF REPORTER

Former president Lee Teng-hui will give a speech in English tomorrow evening in a videoconference with US officials and academics attending a symposium on Taiwan's constitutional reform in Washington, in an effort to defend the legitmacy and necessity of creating a new constitution for Taiwan.

Organized by the Taiwan-based groups Center for Taiwan International Relations (CTIR) and Action for a Taiwanese Constitution (ATC), the Symposium on Taiwan's Constitutional Reform and US-Taiwan-China Relations will be held at the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington tomorrow from 9am to 8pm.

The symposium will commence with Lee's speech on Taiwan's bid for a new constitution from Taipei's Ambassador Hotel through videoconference with the US participants at 9:30pm in Taiwan.

The decision to use a videoconference format was made after President Chen Shui-bian's successful interview with the UN Correspondents Association last month. During his 30 minute speech, Lee will concentrate on the right of the 23 million people of Taiwan to write a constitution for their country.

Lee will also highlight the legitimacy of the move and the need for Taiwan to become a normal country, said Wang Kang-hou, financial director of the ATC.

Lee will say that the Republic of China Constitution that was enacted in 1947 no longer suits Taiwan's needs, and it is clear that Taiwan needs a new one, Wang said. Lee oversaw six revisions of the Constitution during his presidential term, yet even these changes have not overcome the irrelevancy of the Constitution, Lee will say, Wang said.

Moreover, Wang said, Lee will stress that formulating a new constitution corresponds to Taiwan's demand for further democratization, and if Taiwan's democracy becomes more mature by new constitution, it will contribute to peace in Asia.

However, according to Wang, Lee will not bring up the issue of Taiwan's independence, but will simply accentuate the significance of rectifying Taiwan's official name from the "Republic of China" to "Taiwan."

World United Formosans for Independence Chairman Ng Chiau-tong, also one of the ATC organizers, said that pro-independence groups will continue to hold meetings in Japan and in Europe explaining to international audiences that Taiwan will not provoke cross-strait tensions.

Many Asia specialists and people who are concerned about Taiwan's new constitution will participate in the forum and give speeches, including former chairman of American Institute in Taiwan Nat Bellocchi; Larry Niksch, an Asian specialist in the Congressional Research Service; John Tkacik, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation; Arthur Waldron, the director of Asian Studies at American Enterprise Institute and James Auer, a former Special Assistant for Japan in the Office of the US Secretary of Defense.

Senior Advisor to the President Koo Kwang-ming's, Chen Lung-chu, head of the Taiwan UN Alliance, Shane Lee, a professor of law and politics at Chang Jung University and Examination Yuan President Yao Chia-wen are also planning to attend the forum in Washington.

The Chinese Television System is scheduled to provide the technical assistance for the videoconference.

Government distances itself from ad

UNREPRESENTATIVE: Presidential Office officials were firm in their denials of having any knowledge of a controversial ad run by a senior presidential adviser

By Huang Tai-lin
STAFF REPORTER WITH AGENCIES

The recent advertisement placed by Senior Adviser to the President Koo Kwang-ming in US and Taiwanese newspapers had nothing to do with the government, a Presidential Office official said yesterday.

Deputy Secretary-General of the Presidential Office James Huang said Koo's ads "do not represent the government's stance" and that "the Presidential Office had no prior knowledge of them."

Huang made the remarks yesterday in response to media queries about Koo's full-page advertisements, which appeared in Monday's Washington Post, the New York Times and the Taipei Times on Tuesday.

The 2,000-word advertisement, entitled "US adherence to one China policy only benefits communist dictators: Let Taiwan speak out for a lasting peace," urges the US government to face political reality concerning Taiwan and to reassess its "one China" policy.

In the ads, Koo said the US "one China" policy, based on the 1972 Shanghai Communique, no longer fits the political realities in Taiwan and said that he hopes the US government can reassess its "one China" policy in view of Taiwan's changing public opinions.

In the ads, the statement concluded with Koo's signature, and included his title as senior presidential adviser.

Huang also spoke about media reports that said US deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian affairs Randall Shriver suggested the Presidential Office give a clarification about Koo's ads and Taiwan's position.

Koo, who is currently on a trip overseas, told CNA on Tuesday in Washington that the ads he placed in newspapers had nothing to do with the government.

"I paid for the ads myself, and the Taiwanese government knew nothing about it in advance," Koo, a long-term advocate for Taiwan's independence, was reported to have said.

Meanwhile, in related news, President Chen Shui-bian yesterday said that no war would take place across the Strait during his presidential term, which will run till 2008.

"Before my term is up in 2008, there will be no problems across the Taiwan Strait, because Taiwan will not make any provocation. I believe peace can be assured across the Taiwan Strait, and no war will take place," Chen said.

Chen made the remarks while receiving the head of Morgan Stanley's Worldwide Investment Bank, Terry Meguid, at the Presidential Office.

Acknowledging the high expectations for his National Day speech, slated for Oct. 10, Chen yesterday reiterated the content of his Double Ten Day speech will be "positive and constructive" and ease cross-strait tensions.

Chen also told Meguid that the government was making an important effort in trying to create a good investment environment and attract foreign investors' interest.

China's threats go beyond Taiwan

By Paul Lin

In an attempt to repair the damage after China was offended by the visit to Taipei of Lee Hsien Loong, Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo criticized Taiwan independence in a speech in the UN General Assembly. The speech didn't get much of a response from Taiwanese media and politicians at the time.

Three days later, however, when Minister of Foreign Affairs Mark Chen returned from the US, he responded to Yeo's criticism during a meeting with an organization from southern Taiwan. His use of a colloquial Taiwanese expression has been played up by some politicians and media outlets, who are now demanding his resignation.

Their reaction has been even fiercer than that of Chen's target, Singapore. This kind of topsy-turvy logic could only occur in Taiwan. But the reaction of these politicians and media was not due to their support or feelings for Singapore. Rather, it is because Singapore has become a spokesperson for China. This is why they so vigorously defend Singapore's anti-Taiwanese statements.

Their aim is to sow discord between Taiwan and Singapore in order to help China isolate Taiwan on the international stage.

Be it "snot" or "balls," such words must of course not enter the language of diplomacy, but it is not a big deal when they are used in a speech aimed at a domestic audience. Sensational reporting by the media, however, has made it seem as if these words were aimed at other countries, which makes it difficult [for Chen] to get off the hook.

But is this really a topic interesting enough to sustain several days of exaggerated media reporting? It is not very different from expressions in Mandarin or Cantonese meaning the same thing.

Although we should condemn Singapore's interference in Taiwan's domestic affairs in strong terms, there is no need to devote too much time and effort doing so, because we must also understand Singapore's position, which in some ways is similar to Taiwan's. First, China wants to annex Taiwan, and Singapore also risks annexation. China has always believed that the descendants of the Yellow Emperor must make up one China, and that there cannot be two Chinas or one China and one Taiwan. That of course also means that there cannot be one China and one Singapore either.

Second, if we are to follow China's "since-the-days-of-old" logic, then we should argue that the minuscule island of Singapore has been part of Malaysian territory "since the days of old." Singapore could only declare independence because of the interference of British colonialism. Doesn't that mean that if China can start a war to "liberate" Taiwan, Malaysia also has the right to start a war to annex Singapore?

It is in order to deal with this threat that Singapore is fawning over China -- it used to exhort Hong Kong not to oppose China, and now it is criticizing Taiwan for opposing China. Singapore shows such a lack of principle that it even allowed China to make whatever changes it wanted to the memoirs of "founding father" Lee Kuan Yew's.

In this respect, Taiwan has retained more dignity than Singapore. Only Taipei's former deputy mayor, Pai Hsiou-hsiung, has had his speech manuscript changed by China -- ?during a visit to Shanghai. China has not, however, dared change speeches by former president Lee Teng-hui and President Chen Shui-bian. As the Chinese saying goes, only if you humiliate yourself will you be humiliated by others.

Although Singapore's leadership is currying favor with China without worrying about sacrificing the interests of Hong Kong and Taiwan, they of course also have a bottom line. For example, even though Singapore upholds "Asian values," the leadership is very clear in advocating that the US should maintain a military presence in Asia, because the US can protect Singapore from being annexed. Taiwan does not act in this way.

A few months ago, a Chinese tourist was humiliatingly treated as a prostitute by Singaporean authorities, seriously damaging the city-state's image. Looking to preserve calm in the overall situation, Taiwan did not exaggerate the incident. Now, however, Singapore requites this kindness with ingratitude to suck up to China.

If Singapore really is following Confucian teachings, it should remember the Confucian saying that "you should not do to others what you don't want done to yourself." Taiwan and Singapore should cooperate to avoid annexation by the regional hegemon.

Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.

Truth committees and sour grapes

A well-known anecdote tells of a scientist who announces that he has invented a solvent capable of dissolving any existing material. A suspicious person then asks the scientist what he uses to store the substance.

In Taiwan, there is an institution that is just as mighty as that solvent. It can pass laws that would destroy the nation's legal foundations -- the Constitution, constitutional politics and human rights -- and there is no mechanism with which to restrict it. It is the legislature. In the past, on the instruction of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, this all-powerful institution froze the Constitution by passing the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion, which became the most potent instrument of Chiang's authoritarian rule.

Although Taiwan is now a democracy, the spirit of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) remains the same. The blue camp, holding a legislative majority, recently helped pass the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Statute on the instruction of KMT Chairman Lien Chan . Transcending the Constitution and human rights, this statute undermines the principle separating the government into five branches as specified in the Constitution and also tramples on human rights. The law is not meant to pave the way for new authoritarian rule under the KMT, but rather to avenge Lien's defeat in the presidential election.

The statute stipulates that the funds required by the truth committee will come from the Cabinet's budget, and the Cabinet does not have the right to refuse. This is in clear violation of the powers bestowed on the Cabinet in the Budget Law, including budget allocation, review and execution rights.

The statute also stipulates that truth committee members will be appointed proportionally according to party representation in the legislature -- effectively usurping the authority of the Judicial Yuan. In addition, there are no laws restricting or regulating the committee, which is not required to produce subpoenas, search warrants or other documents required in any legitimate judicial procedure, and thus it all but overturns the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Furthermore, according to this statute, investigations by the committee need not follow normal legal procedures, and individuals, organizations and even government bodies cannot refuse to be investigated, unless they are willing to face fines up to NT$1 million, possible prison sentences and denial of their right to leave the country. This is a gross violation of human rights, pure and simple.

Under the Constitution, the Control Yuan has the right to launch investigations and impeachment proceedings. In response to calls for an investigation into the March 19 shooting, President Chen Shui-bian suggested the Control Yuan's right to investigate be exercised in conjunction with prosecutors in order to clarify the incident under the direction of Control Yuan President Frederick Chien -- who is regarded by many as a pillar of social justice in the government. The statute that has been passed by the legislature infringes on the Control Yuan's powers of investigation, conceding its power to the truth committee.

On Tuesday, the blue camp proposed amendments to the statute. But as DPP spokesperson Chen Chi-mai said, all the pan-blue camp is trying to do is reduce the extent to which the statute contravenes the Constitution from 85 percent to 75 percent.

There is no guessing how many more constitutional crises Taiwan will have to endure if Lien does not get his way and become president. The KMT's reactionary nature is unwavering. In the year-end legislative elections, the people must decide whether Lien's attack on constitutional government is worthy of their support.