Voting aimed at China’s legislators

For most of his life, Dan Pu did not see himself an activist – but it changed last year.

Angry that he considered the undemocratic behavior of Taiwan’s legislators and the obvious Chinese influence in parliament, he joined the thousands of others on massive street protest. Two months ago, he signed up with a campaign group.

He had never done it before. “Previous social movements were important, but frankly, they did not angry me,” said the 39-year-old BBC photographer. “We are citizens … And we need to make sure our society adheres to its democratic systems and spirit.”

Now this anger reaches a fracture. On Saturday, Taiwan will vote to decide whether more than two dozen legislators who are accused of China should be expelled, which is called “Dabami” or a great recall.

An unprecedented vote can change the balance of political power in Taiwan. But this has already deepened political divisions, on both sides of the discussion, which claims to be the sacrificial democracy of Taiwan.

It began with the elections in January last January, when voters elected as president the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) William Lai, but gave the opposition a dominant presence in the parliamentary legislative.

In the following months, the main opposition party of the Kumintang worked with the smaller People’s Party of Taiwan and independent to block the DPP bills and adopt conflicting legislative acts. This included a restriction on the powers of the Constitutional Court, the government’s budget reducing and raising the threshold for the vote.

These steps have caused considerable indignation among some Taiwans who considered them as detaining the PPP government, strengthening the opposition’s parliamentary power.

In May 2024, thousands began to hold protests in what was called the Movement of the Blue Bird, which was partially named after Taipei, where many gathered.

Many in the movement believe that the opposition led by a kumintan, which is known for its relatively friendly position in China, under the influence of Beijing and secretly pushes China’s agenda in the legislative body of Taiwan.

The party denied this, but the suspicion grew when a group of cumintang legislators visited China last year and welcomed the official Communist Party official Wang Haning.

Bluebird civilian groups have started petitions to displace different cumintang legislators, while the Cumintang supporters have avenged, doing the same with some DPP legislators.

So far, 31 legal deputies have received sufficient preliminary support to proceed to the final vote. All of these places are occupied by kumintang – and if sufficiently recalled, it may mean that the DPP will eventually receive the majority in the legislative body.

While Taiwan had previously had voting recall, he has never seen so much in such a short time.

On Saturday, citizens in 24 districts will vote for a simple yes or no question: whether they agree to leave the legislator. Another voting round for the rest of the recall will take place in August.

In each district, if the number of votes exceeds 25% of the registered voters and more than half the approval, the place will be released and the elections must take place within three months.

This means that the voter turnout is crucial for the success of the great recall – and this is the reason why civilian groups are tirelessly flooded by social media and knocking the streets engaged in voices.

On a recent night, on weekdays, Dan Pou and several members of his civil group stood near the Taipei subway station. Some conducted banners and chanted slogans, while others distributed papers and packages made of fabric, decorated with the words “Let’s together to vote” and “say” yes. “

Mr. Dan admitted that with several voices of recall, which occur at the kumintang’s strongholds, even if they succeeded, the party could be re-elected in the elections.

However, a great memory is still worth it, it insisted, because it was a way to “correct our democracy.”

Regardless of the result, he “would have sent a strong signal to all the political parties that you must respect the last wishes of Taiwan citizens.”

Mr. Dan admitted that many on the Bluebird movement were DPP supporters, but denied that civil groups were funded by the party – the theory that the opposition was strongly pushed.

“We do not care whether the DPP scoring wins. What is more relevant to us is what we hope to have a regular parliament that is not close to China and the Communist Party of China.”

He also made a problem with what he saw as weak replies DPP, saying: “From the first address, civilian groups say DPP that there are many of us … We urge DPP to join us.”

DPP originally sought to retreat from great memories. But in the end, this showed its support, and Lai emphasized that the DPP “must comply with the power of people” and ordered the party officials to help groups “defend the nation”.

This inevitably caused the opposition’s accusation that the DPP secretly developed a great memory and movement of the blue bird, indicating that the DPP could reap the greatest political benefit.

Not only is it a chance to win a permanent majority in the legislative body. Even if Kumintang eventually wins in the election, the DPP would spend the majority for a few weeks, giving it enough time to promote important laws.

Protests against records organized by kumintan and other opposition parties have attracted thousands. At one of these rallies in Taipei’s new area last weekend, fans showed waving banners and chanted “not to vote”, crossing their hands.

When they took the stage, the speaker after the speaker condemned the great memory, characterizing William Laya as a fascist and authoritarian traitor of Taiwan.

Large screens lost video from Lya to make it look like Adolf Hitler with the words “Furoer Liy”, as well as the slogan “Green Terror” – a link to the color of the DPP and white terror, the authoritarian government and political repression.

The rhetoric repeated such a Beijing, which went into the discussion while viewing from afar. His Taiwan Bureau accused Lay of “participating in a dictatorship under the guise of democracy” and “using all the funds that can be suppressed by the opposition.”

“The legislators withdrew the majority of voters in their constituencies. If they are not good enough, they can be voted in the next election,” said the Mu Zili rally. “Why should we use this evil way to get rid of them?”

The 68-year-old night-changing worker insisted that the legislators were aimed simply because they belonged to the Kumintang and that Blues activists worked at DPP.

“You can’t, one party to dismiss the other in one big recall, it is not democratic,” said Ms. Mu.

“I’m on the side of the blue,” she added, citing the color of the cumintang party. “But I’m not against green. I am not here because I support the kumintang, but protecting democracy.”

But there are also many Taiwans who are on the fence.

Watching that the resident of Banya Pega Lin was in the lateral lines. Like a few other random people with whom the BBC talked, she was surprised by the fuss about the great memory.

“I do not know what it really is, I didn’t keep an eye on the discussions … So I have no opinion,” said a 43-year-old childcare worker.

“I will vote after I read more and decide on how I feel this day.”

Analysts say that regardless of the results, the great recall will leave a long -term influence on the polarized Taiwan society.

Political struggles sometimes become unpleasant. The legislators covered in the parliament because of the political impasse, while the activists collided with Doksks and abuse. Mr. Dan told the BBC that when he was leaving, he and his teammates were attacked or pushed by residents against voting.

Voting also did not go without scandal: officials discovered numerous fake signatures, many dead voters, with the recall of the petitions as DPP and Kumintang legislators.

Voting “to consolidate the concept of four-year terms, which are not data, but depending on the performance and are exposed to periodic reviews. Political polarization is likely to deteriorate before it improves,” said Wen-you Song, political scientist with a study program of the Taiwanese National University.

But a great memory is the “creation of space for new political activity”, especially for DPP supporters, added Dr. Song, which he characterized as a common good to the sustainability of civil society.

Ian Chong, an unresisable scientist from Carnegie China, said that if many votes withdrawal is successful, “one signal he sent to politicians in Taiwan is that they should be careful with how far they are pushing the line in public sentiment … They cannot make too much.”

“But if it comes out, it backers the politicians do what they want,” he said.

“This will strengthen the polarization … And it would be easy for politicians to write off a great memory of another civil society movement that has no sufficient impetus outside a certain part of the population.”

However, if it was a close but not convincing result, it may mean that “Cuminton and DPP must eventually seek compromises and work together.”

This, adding Dr. Chong, “may not be bad for Taiwan.”