The vote targeting ‘pro-China’ lawmakers

For most of his life, Deng Pu did not see himself as active – but that changed last year.

He was angry at what he felt was the non -democratic behavior by legislators in Taiwan and the Chinese influence in Parliament, joining thousands of others in a huge protest in the street. Two months ago, subscribe to a campaign group.

He did not do these things before. “The previous social movements were important, but frankly it did not make me angry,” 39 -year -old photographer told the BBC. “We are citizens … and we need to make sure to stick to our society with democratic systems and spirit.”

Now, this anger reaches a turning point. On Saturday, Taiwan will retain a vote to decide whether to expel more than twenty legislators accused of being very close to China, while it was called “Dabamian”, or the great summons.

The unprecedented vote may change the balance of political power in Taiwan. But already depths of political divisions, with both sides of the debate that they claim to save the Holy Democracy in Taiwan.

It started in the January elections, when voters chose the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) William Lay, but the opposition gave the dominant presence in the parliamentary legislative Yuan.

In the following months, the main opposition party Kuomintang worked with the smaller and independent People’s Taiwan Party to prevent DPP bills and pass the controversial pieces. This included reducing the powers of the Constitutional Court, reducing the government’s budget, and raising the threshold to hold votes.

These moves sparked great anger among some Taiwanese, who saw them suffering from the DPP government while strengthening the parliamentary force of the opposition.

In May 2024, thousands began protesting what became known as the Bluebird movement, which was partially named after Taipei Street, where many gathered.

Many people in the movement believe that the opposition, led by Kuomintang, which is famous for its relatively friendly stance in China, is affected by Beijing and pushing the China’s agenda secretly in the legislative body in Taiwan.

The party denied this, but the doubts came when a group of legislators in Kuomintang visited China last year and was welcomed by Wang Hing, the Supreme Communist Communist official.

Civil groups in the Bluebird movement launched the petitions to overthrow the various legislators in the commenga, while the Comtenang supporters took revenge by doing the same thing to some of the legislators at DPP.

So far, sits for 31 seats have received preliminary support to follow up the final vote. All of these seats are kept by Kuomintang – and if enough is called successfully, it may mean that DPP finally earns the majority in the legislative body.

While Taiwan held the calls before, it did not witness many of them during a short period of time.

On Saturday, citizens will vote in 24 provinces on a simple yes or no doubt: whether they agree to operate the legislator. Another round of voting will be held in August for the remaining summons issues.

In each region, if the number of votes exceeds 25 % of registered voters and more than half of them agree to the summons, the seat will be evacuated and sub -elections must be held within three months.

This means that voters ’demand is crucial to the success of the great summons – this is why civil groups have been overwhelmed by social media and the bombing of streets that suffer from votes.

On the last day of the last week, Deng Bou and several members of his civil group stood outside the Taipei metro station. Some held signs and slogans chanting, while others distributed paper fans and tissue packages decorated with words “Let’s go out together to vote” and “say yes to the summons.”

Mr. Deng admitted that with the presence of many voices that occur in Kuomintang Strongholds, even if it succeeds, the party can be re -elected in the sub -elections.

However, the great summons is still worth it, as he insisted, because it was a way to “correct our democracy”.

Whatever the result, it “sends a strong signal to all political parties, you must respect the latest desires of Taiwan citizens.”

Mr. Deng admitted that many in the Bluebird movement were DPP supporters, but he denied that the civil groups were funded by the party – a theory that the opposition strongly led.

“We are not interested in whether the DPP wins the sub -elections. What is more urgent for us is that we hope that we have an ordinary parliament, not approaching China and the Chinese Communist Party.”

He also assumed a problem with what he saw a weak response from DPP, saying: “From the first bastard of summons so far, the civil groups were telling DPP that citizens were here and that there are many of us … We are strongly calling for joining us.”

DPP initially sought to move away from itself from the great summons. In the end, however, it showed its support, as Lay confirmed that the DPP “must correspond to the strength of the people” and ordered party officials to help groups supporting the “nation protection”.

This inevitably fueled the opposition’s accusation that the DPP designed the great restoration movement and the Bluebird movement secretly, indicating the fact that the DPP can make the most political gains.

It does not only stand the opportunity to win a permanent majority in the legislative body. Even if Kuomintang eventually won the sub -elections, the DPP would have kept a majority for a few weeks, giving him enough time to pay through decisive laws.

The anti -occurrence protests by Kuomintang and other opposition parties attracted thousands. In one of these gatherings in the new Taipei area in BanQiao at the end of last week, supporters appeared signs chanting “no to vote” while crossing their arms.

When they moved to the theater, the spokesman condemned after the spokesperson the great summons while William Lay described as a fascist and authoritarian traitor of Taiwan’s democracy.

Large screens played videos of Lai Doctored to make him look like Adolf Hitler with the words of “Fuhre Lai”, as well as the slogan “Green Terrorism” – referring to the color of the DPP party and white terrorism, a period of authoritarian rule and political repression under the Commentang.

The speech echoed the Beijing speech, who fought in the discussion while watching from afar. The Taiwan Lay Office accused “to engage in dictatorship under the guise of democracy” and “use all possible means to suppress the opposition.”

“The legislators were chosen in the field of retrieval by the majority of voters in their areas. If they are not good enough, they can be voted in the upcoming elections,” said Mo Zelly. “Why should we use this evil way to get rid of it?”

The 68 -year -old worker insisted that legislators were simply targeting because they belonged to Kuomintang, and that Bluebird activists were working in DPP.

“You cannot drop another party in a great summons, and this is not a democratic,” said Ms. “.

“I am my side with blue,” she added, referring to the color of the Kuomintang party. “But I do not oppose the green. I am here not because I support the quantang, but to protect democracy.”

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

Watching the anti -falling gathering from the side lines was Baiji Lyn, residing in Panaguo. Like many other passers -by to the BBC, she was confusing the uproar over the great summons.

“I don’t know what is really about it, I have not followed the discussion at all … so I have no opinion,” said 43 -year -old childcare worker.

“I will vote after I read more and decide based on what I feel that day.”

Analysts say that regardless of the result, the great summons will always have an impact on the polarized community of Taiwan.

Political fighting is sometimes bad. Legislators in Parliament were attracted because of the political stagnation, while activists faced doxxing and abuse. Mr. Ding BBC told him that while he and his teammates were attacked or pushed by the residents who oppose the vote.

The vote also did not disappear without a scandal: officials discovered many forged signatures and many voters available, in a lawsuit against both DPP and Kuomintang lawmakers.

Win Tig, the political scientist in the Taiwan Studies Program in Taiwan Australian, said that the vote “will enhance the concept of four years as not given, but it is conditional on performance and is subject to periodic reviews. Political polarization is likely to get worse before it improves.”

But the great summons is also “creating a space for renewable political activity”, especially for DPP supporters, Dr. Song, who described it as a comprehensive blessing of civil society flexibility in Taiwan.

“One of the references that he will send to politicians in Taiwan is that they should be careful in the extent of their pushing line in public feelings … they cannot stay away from the presence of consequences,” said Ian Chung, a non -resident researcher in Carnegie China, if many of the calls succeed.

“But if he fades, he encourages politicians to do what they want,” he pointed out.

“It will increase polarization of polarization … and it will be easy for politicians to remove the great reminder as another civil society movement that does not get enough momentum that exceeds a certain part of the population.”

If there is a close result, but it is not generally conclusive, this may mean “will have to kuomintang and DPP ultimately search for settlement and work together.”

“It may not be a bad thing for Taiwan,” he added.