Society: Removal and referendum contradictions, expose the DPPs selfishness

United Daily News Agency

The vote will be held tomorrow, and the DPP will also pass the Korean statement for three days.Leaving aside the case at the end of the case, the most important thing for this event was to stop the Korean team's high intervention, and the dismissal of the new system's low threshold caused anti -democratic sequelae.The Democratic Progressive Party led the threshold of removal four years ago. The surface reasons are powerful, but only for their own political purposes, it has nothing to do with the deepening of democracy.This logical chaos has become a common phenomenon for the Cai government for more than four years.

At the end of 2016, Tsai Ing -wen took office for half a year. The DPP led the threshold for the removal of the dismissal of public officials under the leadership of the public official, and it has never been promoted to publicity.The surface reasons are: let the latest public opinion show and supervise the public office of the public office, but the actual reason is that the previous appendix cut off the blue camp legislators.Looking at the world's democratic countries, there are very few people who have dismissed officials and the people of the people. It is unique to launch a political dismissal without a specific illegal negligence.

For other democratic countries, there are three reasons for the removal system. Three reasons: First, according to democratic theory, once the officials or the people of the people are selected, they have formed a commission and entrusting relationship with voters.The latest public opinion effect does not need to be removed separately.Second, the nature of political removal is close to the nature of the election, and the dismissal is easily reduced to the election extension war.

Taiwan initially formulated the rules of removal, which adopted a high threshold, and the purpose was to avoid the dismissal of the election results.After the threshold for removal was reduced, Huang Guochang, a legislator Huang Guochang, was used three years ago, that is, many problems emerging, now that Han is even more serious.There are several controversy: First, the main reason to launch the Korean Korean is that South Korea ’s Yu was elected as president shortly after being elected; however, this is not universal, but it is only controversial.Moreover, similar to the current officials of the people's ones who moved to other elections, all are everywhere.Secondly, South Korea ’s Yu received more than 890,000 votes when he was elected, but he had to remove him, but it only cost more than 570,000 votes, which will form a few anti -democratic countercurrents that reject the majority of anti -democracy.

In addition, in accordance with the election law, the removal should be proposed by the electoor that civil servants shall not participate; but this time the Korean event, the ruling party has participated in the relationship.The leaders who launched the Korean Korean are actually officials of the Chen Ju city government; the public power of government power at all levels is endless.At the last moment, even Tsai Ing -wen also directly used the status of the chairman to directly order the Korean mobilization.In this way, the removal of the removal of the election will not only deny the value of the election, but also give the person with public power to have their own space, deprive the original election public opinion.Can such an institutional design say that there is no problem?

Looking at it, the DPP's request for the referendum law and mobilizing it against the Korean Restaurant just confirmed the logic of the DPP's revision of the law and the anti -Democratic Lord's words and deeds.As a direct civil rights, referendum can make up for the lack of politics. Its value is generally affirmed, but countries are different in the design of the system.Although the referendum is a long -term proclaimed by the DPP, after the DPP's referendum in 2018, the nine -in -one election was defeated, but he did not think about the defeat.The referendum once.In this way, the voting rate must be reduced, and the referendum is not easy to pass. The success rate of the referendum and the people's exercise of direct civil rights are both double harm.

It is shameful that the only reason for the DPP to revise the referendum law is to reduce the burden on election.It can be described as appalling in order to select the technical issue and denying the value of democracy.What is even more ridiculous is that recently, Tsai Ing -wen thrown out the issue of constitutional amendments, and the DPP immediately advocated that the referendum of constitutional amendments should be held in the 2022 election.The people's referendum is not allowed to abduct the election, but they have to abduct the constitutional constitution. The DPP's contradictions and selfish self -use are really naked.

From the threshold for removal to the referendum regulations, every revision of the law, I saw that the DPP regards national laws as its own stepping stalls and scoot stones, tailor -made for themselves.Such a short -sightedness, only the model of political fighting: For the sake of power, there is nothing that cannot be done, and nothing cannot be changed.