|
EDITORIAL: Political
dirty tricks must be stopped
Taiwan’s democratization is a proud achievement. The country’s transformation
without bloodshed from authoritarianism to a genuine democracy has been lauded
as a success story and the consolidation of its democracy through five
presidential elections has been hailed as a beacon of democracy in Asia.
However, how are people in Taiwan to take pride in the nation’s democratic
achievements when dirty tricks are allegedly used to influence elections?
On Tuesday, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Special Investigation Division (SID)
closed its investigation into Yu Chang Biologics Co and concluded that former
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was not
involved in any wrongdoing.
However, considering the Jan. 14 presidential election was some time ago and how
many voters at the time — following a months-long campaign by the pan-blue camp
accusing Tsai of irregularities in the case — likely went to the polls with a
negative impression of Tsai, has it not occurred to the SID that its
investigation results came a little too late?
Many people cannot help but wonder whether the prosecutors were helping a
certain candidate by playing along with the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT)
attack on Tsai’s character. The goal of the attack was achieved — Tsai lost the
election.
The SID launched the investigation into the Yu Chang case in late November, a
time when the presidential campaign was reaching fever pitch, with various polls
suggesting Tsai and Ma were neck-and-neck. Noting this, many people have reason
to doubt whether the neutrality of the state apparatus under President Ma Ying-jeou
(馬英九) has been breached.
With Tsai’s integrity intact and with the closure of the SID’s case with no
indictment, some people are questioning the legitimacy of Ma’s election.
However, one question as important as the growing doubt surrounding Ma’s
legitimacy is the emergence of a disturbing pattern compromising the health of
the nation’s democracy: the use of a dirty trick to impede an election result.
Before the Yu Chang case, there was the shooting of Sean Lien (連勝文), son of
former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), during a campaign rally for a KMT
candidate for the New Taipei City (新北市) council on the eve of the Nov. 17
special municipality elections in 2010.
Many recalled how, until then, a number of polls indicated then-DPP New Taipei
City mayoral candidate Tsai had a good chance of winning the race. However,
following the subsequent campaign rhetoric from the KMT and its supporters that
the attack was related to the election and that the DPP stood for violence, the
impact of the shooting was obvious. The DPP won only two of the five special
municipalities, rather than the three it had been expected to win. Then-DPP
Taipei mayoral candidate Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) also suffered a
larger-than-expected vote loss to incumbent Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) of the KMT.
These incidents prove the concerns expressed in a report by the International
Election Observation Mission that the Jan. 14 elections were “mostly free, but
only partly fair,” noting violations of administrative neutrality as among the
“worrying factors” that may have affected the election outcome.
More than any other Taiwanese who value the nation’s democratic credentials, the
opposition should take the lead in standing up and denouncing those who use
dirty tricks to influence elections.
In a sportsmanlike fashion, Tsai said she hoped “there will be no similar nasty
besmirching tactics in future election campaigns.”
That statement alone should not be the end of it.
If the DPP cannot toughen up in the face of clear dirty tricks against its
former chairperson and presidential candidate, many wonder how likely it is that
rubbishing tactics will be deployed again, come the 2016 presidential election.
|
