PDF(2.7mb) - 國家政策研究基金會

118 Taiwan Development Perspectives 2009
Conclusion
Quite clearly, there is no agreement on how to
amend the Assembly and Demonstration Act. The fundamental
difference is whether to remove all control or
to keep part of it. Civil rights advocates and parliamentarians
are more liberal, insisting that all that is necessary
for voters to take to the streets is to give the law
enforcement authorities their “voluntary notification.”
The government is conservative and wants “coercive
notification” of organizers so that the police may veto
any assembly or demonstration at their own discretion,
whereas no veto power is available under the “voluntary
notification” mechanism.
Freedom of expression is the core consideration of
all proponents of the amendment except the Executive
Yuan. In terms of freedom of speech, the amendment
versions proposed by the civic bodies and the lawmakers
leave more room for people to speak out through
their public meetings for organizers are not liable to
punishment. As a matter of fact, organizers are convinced
it is no crime to rally for a cause even if that
may cause the police and the public some trouble. On
the other hand, the government version is not quite in
line with freedom to speech. The government wants
organizers to inform the police of their public meetings
in advance and the police can still ban the meetings or
modify the meeting schedules. If the police do so, the
organizers have no way to ask for a review of the police
decisions.
coercive notification mechanism to lighten the burden
on the police, who will be made better able to handle
any contingencies arising from more assemblies and
demonstrations.
Although each version is a trade-off between
freedom of expression and police workload, the one
proposed by the Executive Yuan might be a realistic
balance between the stance of the police, the expectation
of the public, and the intention of President Ma
Ying-jeou who promised a revamping of the act
adopted in 1988. The overhaul is clearly stated in his
white paper on human rights issued while he was campaigning
for president.
Though the voluntary notification mechanism has
bipartisan support in the Legislative Yuan, it may not be
passed with ease. Among legislators, this act is too controversial
to summon agreement from the significant
stakeholders in the near future. However, the Executive
branch traditionally has the capability of swaying public
opinion on a political agenda, which, in turn, may
influence the voting in the Legislative Yuan. If the
Kuomintang, which controls a virtual three-fourths
majority in the legislature, decides to throw full support
behind its administration, the act to be finally adopted
may be a conservative and restrictive one. Whether
President Ma will approve of the conservative act or try
to exert his influence over Kuomintang lawmakers to
go against their party line remains to be seen
The heavy workload of the police is the major
concern of the Executive Yuan, albeit it is not a key
issue to all other proponents. Their versions, if adopted,
may make it easier for people to march in protest, further
increasing the heavy workload of the police and the
chances of their clashes with protesting crowds.
When violence occurs in clashes, the police are inevitably
criticized. If they do not control the rowdy, the police
are damned for “being too soft” on violence-prone
members of the crowd. If they repress the rowdy in
force, they are condemned for police brutality. It is understandable
that the government wants to adopt the