Expose the Motives of Anonymous Benefactors, or DPP is Doomed

Expose the Motives of Anonymous Benefactors, or DPP is Doomed
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 2, 2013

Summary: The criminal underworld has joined the DPP. This news has grabbed the headlines for the last two weeks. The DPP Central Standing Committee has finally proposed reforms. These responses symbolize the DPP's rejection of members with ties to organized crime. But they do little to address party members' disillusionment. In fact, they reveal a lack of resolve. Basically they are dodging the issue.

Full Text below:

The criminal underworld has joined the DPP. This news has grabbed the headlines for the last two weeks. The DPP Central Standing Committee has finally proposed reforms. It has lengthened the minimum membership period from one year to two years. Only then can a new member vote in party elections or be a party candidate. Most important are the "provisions for the exclusion of criminal elements." The committee has also formed an investigative team. The team will conduct a thorough investigation into rumors regarding abnormal, large scale party membership drives. These responses symbolize the DPP's rejection of members with ties to organized crime. But they do little to address party members' disillusionment. In fact, they reveal a lack of resolve. Basically Su is dodging the issue.

The current dispute was provoked by DPP legislative caucus chief Ker Chien-ming, who initiated the large-scale party membership drive. The media later revealed that many of the new party members had ties to the criminal underworld. The DPP has held drives to bring young people and political appointees into the party. But drives to bring triad members into the party are unheard of. The public was shocked. Party members were outraged. Party Chairman Su Tseng-chang's first response was utterly feeble. As a result, former Chairman Tsai Ing-wen proposed an ad hoc committee to conduct a full investigation. Only then did Su realize he had to confront the issue head on.

To make matters worse, Su Tseng-chang had the 　temerity to blame the Kuomintang. He said, "The KMT had better not try to corrupt the DPP with black gold!" But what do DPP links to organized crime have to do with the KMT? What is Su implying? That Ker Chien-ming is a KMT mole? Su Tseng-chang's response backfired badly. It merely drew more fire and touched off more speculation. After all, Ker Chien-ming's party membership drive was seen as an effort on behalf of Su. Ever since Su Tseng-chang assumed the Party Chairmanship, his relationship with the other "party princes" has been tense. Rumors are that Su's relations with Tsai as, well as his relations with Hsieh, are tense. Su Tseng-chang was slow on the uptake. His response led to accusations of selfishness from within his own party.

Ker Chien-ming recruited many new party members with dubious backgrounds. Media reports say the Frank Hsieh faction also includes party members who are triad members. Both Ker Chien-ming and Frank Hsieh faction members sternly deny these claims. Are the rumors true? If they are, then the leaders of the Democratic Progressive Party have sunk to new lows in their struggle for power. Are the rumors false? If they are, then Su Tseng-chang and the other DPP heavyweights must acknowledge one thing. The struggle for power has degenerated to the level where rivals resort to framing each other. In this case, what right do DPP leaders have to talk about returning to power?

Let us be fair. Even gang members, as long as they have not been deprived of their civil rights, have the constitutional right to participate in politics. Of couse, if a political party does not want them as members, or does not want them to participate in its political activities, that is its right. One can talk about imposing tall barriers to party membership. But that is easier said than done. Unless one intends to ask prosecutors to assist. Anyone wanting to join the party would have to have a clean record. No wonder when large numbers of people join the party, they usually apply at local party offices. All are reluctant to show themselves. Background checks are impossible or difficult. More importantly, the DPP's standards for denying party membership include corruption, violations of the Money Laundering Control Act, the Hooligan Crackdown Act, the Drug Control Act, and the Guns, Ammunition and Weaponry Control Ordinance. Anyone in violation of these may not join the DPP. The above standards constitute a threshold. But acts such as the Hooligan Crackdown Act were long ago struck down by High Court Justices as unconstitutional. Therefore these "provisions for the exclusion of criminal elements." are a major disappointment.

Su Tseng-chang made these "provisions for the exclusion of criminal elements." He also made provisions for the exclusion of Communists. That is even more unreal than his "provisions for the exclusion of criminal elements." Rumors have emerged about Taiwan businessmen on the Mainland persuading 3000 people to join the party. Was Su Tseng-chang responding to this? If so, the DPP's attempt to conduct a thorough investigation into Communist ties will be even more difficult than its investigation into triad ties. And little wonder. Party members may not accept political contributions from Taiwan businessmen on the Mainland. Party members may not accept political contributions from friends or relatives with businesses on the Mainland. And what about party officials? If their spouses travel to the Mainland to study, will their party membership be revoked?

Elements from the criminal underworld joining the party has created an uproar. But this is merely an annual drama enacted by the DPP party leadership, as part of their power shuffle. Party members are using dummy voters in their internecine power struggle. Anonymous benefactors have gained control over negotiations among the party leadership. They have expanded their control from northern Taiwan to central Taiwan. Su Tseng-chang even endorsed and applauded this. Is that not absurd?

Also, from north to south, rumors have emerged from local party headquarters. Apparently these anonymous benefactors have "price lists." Each of them is willing to pay certain prices. These anonymous benefactors support Su, support Tsai, support Hsieh, or any other ambitious party prince. The motivations of these anonymous benefactors must be exposed. Otherwise it will be impossible to eliminate the malignant power struggle within the party. It will be impossible to rehabilitate the reputation of the Democratic Progressive Party

Su Tseng-chang is a founding member of the Democratic Progressive Party. He is a former Secretary-General of the party. He twice served as chairman of the party. Others may not understand the shennanigans involving dummy voters and anonymous benefactors. They may be oblivious. But Su is the leader of the largest opposition party. He must not think only of his personal power. He must realize that power is as changeable as the weather. These anonymous benefactors may not belong to any particular faction. They may not have any personal preferences. But every one of them watches the wind direction. Today they may favor Hsieh. Tomorrow they may favor Su, Today they may favor Su. Tomorrow they may favor Tsai. They will follow whichever party prince gains the upper hand. That is the safest approach. If any party prince, including Su Tseng-chang, indulges his selfish desires, and accepts even the tinyiest of favors, it will damage the Democratic Progressive Party's image and his own, The price will not be worth it.

不清查人頭大戶背後動機 民進黨難自救
2013-05-02
中國時報

黑道入黨爭議喧騰半個月，民進黨中常會終於提出改革辦法，除了延長入黨年限從一年到兩年後，才能取得選舉與被選舉權之外，最重要的是增列「排黑條款」，並組成調查小組，全面調查異常大規模入黨的各種傳聞。此舉雖表達出民進黨拒黑的態度，但對解決黨內人頭黨員之沉痾，卻實效有限，甚至是缺乏決心，根本規避了釐清問題的可能性。

此次爭議風波緣由民進黨立法院黨團總召柯建銘大規模介紹黨員入黨，經媒體披露指其中許多係幫派份子集體入黨。過去民進黨有過青年入黨、政務官入黨，就從沒聽說號召幫派入黨之事，社會為之震驚，黨內為之譁然；偏偏黨主席蘇貞昌第一時間因應軟弱，直到前主席蔡英文提出應成立專案小組全面徹查之後，才意識到自己必須正面以對。

更糟糕的是，蘇貞昌的反應竟是把矛頭對準國民黨，說出「國民黨不要肖想染黑民進黨。」民進黨是否染黑，干國民黨何事？難不成柯建銘還是國民黨的臥底？蘇貞昌的反應反而引來更多負面批評和揣測，特別是柯建銘引介黨員被指係為挺蘇布局而來；蘇貞昌自接任黨主席以來，與黨內各「天王」間的權力關係始終緊張，不論是蘇蔡或蘇謝，都有不合傳聞，蘇貞昌處置慢半拍，更引來黨內對其私心之譏評。

除此之外，最近更傳出除了柯建銘引介大批可能有特殊背景的人頭入黨之外，甚至還有媒體爆料指謝系也找幫派充當人頭黨員，不論是柯建銘或謝系都嚴詞否認。傳聞若真，則民進黨為爭奪黨權已沉淪至難以想像的地步；若傳聞為假，那麼包括蘇貞昌在內的民進黨重量級政治菁英，就必須正視黨內為爭權竟到如此惡質鬥爭、胡亂栽贓放話的地步，那還談什麼重返執政？

持平而論，即使是幫派人士，只要未經褫奪公權，依憲法就有合法的參政權，參與政黨或投身任何政治活動，是他們的自由；當然，任何政黨要不要接受他們入黨成為黨員，也是各政黨的權力。唯嚴審入黨的程序，確實有其困難度，除非請檢調司法協助，凡入黨者都要清查有無案底；也難怪受理大批黨員入黨的地方黨部，個個面有難色，若非查不到就是很難查，更重要的，民進黨用以審查拒絕入黨的犯罪標準包含諸如曾犯貪汙罪、《洗錢防制法》、《檢肅流氓條例》、《毒品危害防制條例》、《槍炮彈藥刀械管制條例》等罪者，都不能申請加入民進黨。上述標準雖也是一種門檻，但是，類如《檢肅流氓條例》早經大法官解釋為違憲並經廢除，以此做為「排黑」準據，難免令人錯愕。

蘇貞昌排黑之外，還要拒紅，這比排黑更抽象，不知蘇貞昌此議是否針對傳聞中台灣有台商集體介紹三千人入黨而來？果若如此，民進黨徹查紅底的工程肯定比徹查黑底更大、更難，凡黨內接受台商政治獻金者，不能收；凡黨內有親朋好友在大陸做生意者，更不能要，更甭提有黨內公職配偶赴大陸念書者，是否得開除其黨籍？

更重要的，這次黑道入黨風波，只是民進黨中央權力改組年度大戲的表象，其根源還是在於黨人為爭黨權競相運用人頭黨員，但凡人頭大戶就掌握與黨中央談判利益或權力的籌碼，黨員大戶從北台灣經營到中台灣，蘇貞昌還特別為此站台鼓勵，豈不荒謬？

此外，從北到南，各地方黨部都傳出這些人頭黨員有所謂的「對價關係」，既有對價一定就有「對象」，這些大戶是挺蘇、挺蔡、挺謝，還是挺任何有志大位的所謂「天王」？不清查這些大戶背後的動機和利害關係，就不可能根絕黨內的惡質權力鬥爭，就無法真正改變民進黨遭破毀的形象。

蘇貞昌是民進黨的創黨黨員，曾任黨祕書長、兩次出任黨主席，黨內人頭黨員、人頭大戶之弊，別人不懂，他不可能不瞭然於胸。做為最大反對黨領袖，胸中不能只有個人的權力算計，要知道權力總是形隨勢轉，所謂的「黨員大戶」即使有特定的派系屬性，或個人偏好，但無不善觀風向；今日可謝明日可蘇，或者今日可蘇明日可蔡，誰能冒出頭就跟誰，這是最保險的算計；任何天王包括蘇貞昌本人，若因私心放縱，即使因此得到小利，損傷的都是民進黨和自己的形像，如此代價，殊為不值。