Public participation in the pandemic:
New possibilities or widened divide?
Editor | Xin-yi Liao
Since the beginning of the pandemic, Taiwanese government agencies have adopted virtual proceedings in place of in-person ones mandated for land expropriation, urban planning and environmental impact assessment.. The practice became even more widely applied when Taiwan saw an increase in its COVID-19 case count in May 2021after which gatherings that are less time-sensitive were instructed to be put on hold. This is especially the case for urban development projects that typically involve a large number of public stakeholders and are required to hold hearings and committee meetings prior to major decisions.
The move, however, has been met with much criticism. In addition to the disputed binding force regarding the officials' statements during such deliberations, the clear lack of government efforts to coordinate supporting measures has failed to make them an appropriate replacement to in-person proceedings. Participants have bewailed the poor streaming quality, limited channels to voice feedback, and the lack of avenue for stakeholders to request for postponement.
Government guidelines around how public stakeholders could participate in the meetings remotely also fall short in proportionality and consistency. For instance, the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) has demanded civil participants delivering commentaries during the open session of environmental impact assessments to abide by a strict three-minute rule, going back on their previous promise to extensive deliberation. The EPA has also banned participants from video recording the meetings, defending the prohibition as a means to securing the commissioners' ''portrait right".
However, an even more significant drawback of these supposedly conduits for public engagement is their de facto exclusion of rural dwellers, senior citizens, and economically disadvantaged individuals susceptible to various levels of digital divide. Many of them already got the short end of the stick when it comes to negotiating with the government and enterprises behind urban development projects. Even worse, recent events have raised substantial concern around how open meetings and public hearings held online are reduced to a tokenized formality meant to expedite the prescribed decision-making and review procedures over highly disputable cases -- one of which being the Taoyuan Aerotropolis development project.
The Taoyuan Aerotropolis project is the largest land-taking case in Taiwan, involving 19,367 plots of land and the forced eviction of nearly 3,350 households in the area. On July 7, 2021, a virtual deliberation was held by the Ministry of the Interior’s Takings Review Task Force to examine the delineation of the land-improvements expropriation proposed by the Taoyuan City government.. While the government did provide three means of participation -- online video conference, remote streaming at a local service center, and phone-ins during an open-floor session -- public stakeholders were not given the chance to request for the rescheduling or cancellation of the event.
In spite of the low (less than 20) turnout and objections raised against the necessity and constitutionality of the land-taking, the Task Force proceeded to pass the decision on the same day. The result was met with immediate backlash as people pointed out that the hearing and voting process was executed hastily and devoid of the underlying premises for public consultation. On top of that, based on the project timeline, relocations would not take place until 2024 and most property holders have yet to receive the revaluation results for the asset concerned. Marking the specific land-improvements to be taken under state power at the moment was premature and hardly justifiable.
The lack of substantive public consultations in various stages of urban development projects has long been the root cause of ongoing controversies, injustice and grievances around these projects. The outright disregard for equitable public participation and the attempt to push through debatable decisions during a pandemic are immensely detrimental to the democratic values and due processes the society upholds. The Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR) stands with the international mandates issued by UNECE that the government must take active measures to ensure means of public participation is available, accessible and affordable for all. Specifically, TAHR calls for Taiwanese governments at all levels to:
- Amend current legislation to modulate the use and conditions of virtual hearing and review processes
- Halt all virtual hearing and review processes before its regularization
- Suspend the reviews of all disputed cases before the resumption of in-person hearing to uphold the spirit and essence of public participation
- Allow stakeholders to request for postponement or cancellation of online hearings in consideration of the digital divide
- Actively improve existing technical deficients and close the digital divide
- Disclose meeting agenda and relevant information in advance for a sufficient period of time for public inspection
- Broadcast meetings online or on public channels
- Provide multiple readily accessible channels for stakeholders to voice their opinions during the meeting
- Publish the authentic recording of the meeting in a timely manner
- Formally reply to public feedback and petitions and comments collected in a timely manner
【Reference】
