Nuclear Phase-out is a Fundamental Issue of Democracy

After the March 18 Legislative Occupy Movement temporarily concluded, Mr. Lin Yi-hsiung immediately issued a statement on "fasting," demanding that the government "halt the construction of Lungmen Nuclear Power Plant." Putting aside how cold-blooded Premier Chiang Yi-huah's response of "self-mutilation to achieve demands" was, as public attention slightly shifts from the controversy over the cross-strait service trade agreement to the nuclear phase-out issue, we must remind ourselves that both are fundamental issues concerning the survival model of Taiwan's democracy.

The slogan "Anti-nuclear is anti-dictatorship," shouted more than twenty years ago, was indeed used to denounce the nuclear energy decision-making of the then party-state capital system coupled with technocratic autocracy. Today, Mr. Lin's remark that "if the overwhelming majority of the country's masters advocate halting the construction of Lungmen, yet those in power still have ways to override public opinion through shady means and continue building it, then our democratic system has lost its normal functions and fallen into crisis" clearly points out the absurd phenomenon that after going through formal democratization processes such as the lifting of martial law and the direct presidential election, Taiwan's existing codes and institutions fundamentally fail to truly implement a democratic constitutionalism. In other words, Taiwan's current system of separation of powers and checks and balances not only fails to resolve disputes triggered by the executive branch's abuse of power in major public policies, but even the sensitivity of the legislative branch and the activism of the judicial branch fall far behind public opinion.

Faced with a nuclear power controversy where nearly eighty percent of public opinion expresses clear misgivings, the executive branch ignores the anxiety and anger displayed by the vast public, stubbornly following its so-called scheduled plan to load fuel rods into the Lungmen plant this June. This approach, using the completely untenable pretext of "acting in accordance with the law," excluding substantive and effective public participation from beginning to end, and only warming up behind closed doors with experts who echo its own views, is not only unhelpful in resolving major public policy disputes, but is also an irresponsible forced push of the entire citizenry into severe risks.

Examining the reality, the executive dictatorship system demonstrated by nuclear energy decision-making over the years and the shady controversy involving the cross-strait service trade agreement stem from the exact same cause—none other than the failure of Taiwan's democratic constitutionalism to be consolidated and deepened through various effective institutional arrangements. Therefore, the Premier's utterance that he is "very confident in preventing a Fukushima-like nuclear disaster from happening in Taiwan," and the mayoral candidates' stances on nuclear risks that are devoid of substance—making the entire citizenry victims of a permanent nuclear safety crisis while no one has to take responsibility—are heartbreaking yet expected.

Mr. Lin is preparing to fast at the I-kuang Church—the site of the Lin family massacre—to awaken the public to the urgency of phasing out nuclear power. Rather than sacrificing himself for the Lungmen controversy, he is, so to speak, being martyred for Taiwan's democracy. However, if the overwhelming majority of public opinion supporting a nuclear phase-out must still suffer from being entangled in various false issues raised by the government, and has no means through immediate and effective democratic procedures to realize the goal of insisting on halting the construction of Lungmen and preventing the extension of existing nuclear power plants, then social conflicts will only escalate day by day. The political pressure stemming from this social force may well be the only means to save Taiwan's democracy.