[quote=“Old Gringo”]The problem you got with a “legal”/“constitutional” solution to the problem is there are few options:
- by law a sitting ROC Prez can only be criminally indicited for two crimes (two different versions of treason)
- The limp dick useless pieces of shit that make up the Control Yuan can only “censure” the prez (meaning "scold him like a schoolboy in disgrace-great Kinks album by the way)
- As for a recall election, for all intents and purposes, impossible as it is a two step process; step one requires a 2/3rds majority of the House of Thieves (the Legislative Yuan) to okay a recall election then it takes a 2/3rds majority of the voters to approve it. [/quote]
Exactly why the whole thing is so confused/fucked up. However, just because they can’t indict him for less than treason, doesn’t mean they can’t get rid of him by winning the argument. Real proof of breaking the law/wrong doing would probably amount to overwhelming moral pressure to stand down or even a palace coup (as opposed to the miliatary one in Soong’s wet dreams). So winning the argument is still an option, even though it doesn’t legally lead inexorably to Chen being indicted.
By implication, the blues/reds should all be calling for radical constitutional overhaul. They all say the President is controling the investigators. So presumably this is a power he should not have. If they want to be able to change the leader on the grounds of being crap, they’d better campaign for a parliamentary system where it’s much easier to get rid of someone because they’re unpopular.
And, since they’re trying to depose Chen, unless Lu is implicated too (in which case we get Su Tseng-Chang), they are by implication campaigning for President Lu. But how many of them are thinking that?
I met a middle aged, middle class woman there last night and chatted for some time. She was a traditional blue WSR voter (though not necessarily strictly affiliated). I asked her the James Soong question and she said she was no fan of his. So I asked her about President Lu and she accepted the implication and said she thought at least she would be clean. My general impression was of her being sick and tired of a populist, divisive tricky lawyer President whose attitude seemed to be “well, the last lot did it, now it’s ‘the son of Taiwan’s’ turn”. It was good to talk to her and more importantly, listen.
As for fighting corruption, it’s got to come from the bottom up. How many of us work at places where the wages don’t match exactly what they tell the government? How many deals are oiled, palms greased etc in Taiwan (and elsewhere too)? My feeling is that for some at least, the feeling is “get the green zealot Chen out, (and probably Ma in - though this can’t really happen short of revolution) and everything will be fine and dandy”.
When the reds convince me that this is a genuine broadly based, non partisan crusade to root out corruption from the bottom to the top and reform the political system to make sure this situation is less likely to happen again, then I’ll be on board.
What’s the chances of that?
