Brian Hioeby Brian Hioe
語言:
English
Photo Credit: Fu Kun-chi/Facebook
IN A SURPRISE move, the KMT suggested last week that it would seek to counter the current wave of recalls against it.
It was initially unclear what the KMT would seek to hold a national referendum on. After all, the pan-Green camp and pan-Blue camps, in committing to recall campaigns against each other, would already be putting up resources and staking political capital.
Yet one has come to observe a pattern in which the KMT is behaving as though it has a large mandate from the public which it probably does not. For one, the KMT only holds a narrow majority in the legislature if it votes together with the smaller pan-Blue political party of the TPP.
The KMT’s majority in the legislature is based on the design of the Legislative Yuan, which has seats apportioned for representation by minority groups, as well as it performing better in smaller districts. If not for the set-up of Taiwan’s government system, the DPP may have been closer to winning an outright majority.
Indeed, it is foolish of the KMT to think that the majority of the public sides with them and that they have a strong mandate when the party has been unable to win a presidential election three consecutive times. It proves strange, then, that the KMT has committed to moves aimed at fundamentally reshaping the government system.
At present, the KMT aims to freeze the Constitutional Court, as well as has engaged in efforts across the last year to block or drastically cut the national budget. The budget cuts would cut 34% of funding available to the government. To prevent recalls against it in the future, the KMT sought to increase the benchmarks for referendums to be binding, as well as institute ID checks for recall signature collection.
Taiwan’s executive branch lacks veto power, nor is there any measure for a vote of no-confidence that would dissolve the legislature and call for a new set of elections. That there are ongoing referendum campaigns against all KMT legislators serves as a de facto move by the public to dissolve the legislature and call for a new set of elections.
It was unclear as to whether the KMT would seek a national referendum on any of its proposed measures. If so, the KMT runs the risk of showing that the public may not support its measures. Though polling shows that the public may support some of the moves pushed for by the KMT if they are framed as judicial reform and constitutional reform, this may still be a risk for the KMT. Certainly, the public may not stand for voting for a drastic budget reduction if they become increasingly aware that this will cut public services. But calling for a referendum on such issues would be risky with the wave of recall campaigns against it, in that the KMT will have its hands full fending them off, and a defeat in the referendum could further weaken its claims to have a mandate.
KMT chair Eric Chu. Photo credit: Eric Chu/Facebook
The KMT, then, appears to now be aiming for a national referendum on capital punishment. Late last week, the KMT announced that it would be seeking a national referendum on the issue.
Specifically, a Constitutional Court ruling on capital punishment last year that narrowed the scope of capital punishment has been framed by the KMT as a de facto abolishment of capital punishment. Though capital punishment is still on the books and has, in fact, been applied since then, the KMT intends to still use the issue as a means of attack on the DPP.
The DPP is internally divided on the issue of capital punishment. However, poll after poll shows that capital punishment is highly popular with the Taiwanese public, with the view that capital punishment is a deterrent to violent crime. As a result, the KMT has often leveraged on the issue by framing the DPP as making society more dangerous through its reluctance to use capital punishment.
This claim is flagrantly untrue, as the Lai administration has continued to carry out executions. In January, the Lai administration carried out its first execution, in what clearly was an attempt to prove that capital punishment was still on the books. If the KMT proceeds on its referendum–which it would likely win–the DPP would probably proceed with another round of executions, again, to prove that capital punishment still takes place.
In this sense, it is not merely that the KMT wishes to put fundamental human rights to a national referendum–regardless of the bad optics for Taiwan on the international stage if it does so. It is that the KMT’s actions will result in another wave of executions. But being in support of further killings may not be so surprising for a political party that has refused to reckon with its authoritarian past, denying the killings that it conducted during Taiwan’s White Terror.
One will expect to see this defense used by KMT legislators regarding the recall as well, then, in that KMT legislators will tout their party’s credentials as the party that embraces the death penalty in order to defend themselves against the recall onslaught. At the same time, it proves a disgrace for the human rights situation in Taiwan to see basic human rights–and on the right for the government to conduct state-sanctioned killings, no less–put to the national vote.