Melamine scare boosts breastfeeding practice

By June Tsai

Melamine contaminated products have sickened thousands of infants in mainland China and left several dead. These tragic deaths and the fear of feeding children toxic products have raised Taiwanese mothers' interest in breastfeeding.

Hospitals in Taipei reported a 30-percent surge in the number of expectant mothers registering to their breastfeeding classes since the melamine scare. Mothers who had just weaned their babies also came to seek advice on how to start breastfeeding again.

According to a survey made by Taiwan's Bureau of Health Promotion in 2004, only 30 percent of new moms started exclusive breastfeeding. This compared to over 70 percent in the United States and 99 percent in Norway. The survey also showed this number fell to 13 percent six months after delivery. Even the rate of mothers feeding children under six months old with a mix of breast milk and formula milk was stunningly low: 20 percent only. This means up to 80 percent of young children in Taiwan relied on infant formula. No wonder any news about tainted formula would trigger panic among parents.

Local groups made urgent calls to renew support for breastfeeding and to provide public facilities to this end. The Breastfeeding Association of Taiwan stated Sept. 20 there had been several occasions in recent years when international companies, such as Nestle in 2004, were forced to recall batches of tainted infant formula. Companies may take prompt measures to ensure safety and health agencies may multiply food checks, but in the end, "breastfeeding is still the best option with regard to immunity protection, nutrition and better mother-baby relationship."

Despite long-time efforts of related government agencies such as the BHP and nonprofit organizations in promoting breastfeeding and encourage social support, the lack of facilities has prevented many new moms from breastfeeding.

In addition to the present regulation on maternity leave which allows pregnant women to take eight weeks of paid leave around delivery time, the Gender Equality in Employment Act amended in April 2007 stipulates an unpaid parental leave up to two years. Yet women are still concerned about losing their jobs or being bullied if they decide to take parental leave.

In addition, both the gender equality law and Labor Standard Act stipulate that a female worker is allowed to breastfeed her baby twice a day, each time for 30 minutes, until it is one year old, and that this shall be deemed as working time. However, because of the lack of breastfeeding rooms at the workplace, the laws could remain just words. "The lack of public facilities is one of the biggest deterrents," said Chen Chao-huei, president of Taiwan Academy of Breastfeeding, citing the BHP's 2004 survey that showed there were less than 1,000 nursing rooms available in public buildings throughout Taiwan.

"The workplace could show support simply by implementing the law," said Chen Yi-chun, director of the Breastfeeding Association.

While 29 percent of the mothers responding to a survey conducted by the BHP in August said they were deterred from breastfeeding by the lack of adequate public facilities, 19 percent revealed their mothers-in-law influenced them, and 10 percent held their neighbors and bosses responsible. Moreover, 57 percent of respondents said their husbands were their biggest support.

"These results show that everyone around a new mother can affect her decision about breastfeeding," Chen Chao-huei said.

She also pointed to the unrestrained advertisement for infant formula in the country. The power of advertisement is such that many people are convinced that human milk is less nutritious than formula milk.

Just in June this year, for example, professionals had to dispute a local media report about tests that concluded formula milk had a higher content of iron than breast milk. "Breast milk contains less iron than formula, yet it is far better absorbed," Chen Chao-huei said. Experts estimate that 50 to 70 percent of the iron in human milk is absorbed compared to only 4 to 10 percent in formula.

Because of this low absorption rate, iron is added into formula to ensure babies absorb enough iron, Chen Yi-chun explained. While the extra iron is metabolized, the process strains needlessly the babies' kidneys, she warned.

Taiwan Academy of Breastfeeding recommended a proper distribution of information concerning infant formulas since some companies tend to advertise beyond the measures specified in the "International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes" promulgated by World Health Organization in 1981. A majority of women complained about marketing personnel contacting them, even though the Code specifically stipulates they should not seek direct or indirect contact with pregnant women or mothers of infants and young children. The organization said government agencies should be responsible for implementing the Code in Taiwan.

The Breastfeeding Association cited the WHO's 1990 "Innocenti Declaration." This document stated that as a global goal for optimal maternal and child health and nutrition, mothers should be able to practice exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of a child's life, and that children should continue to be breastfed up to two years old or beyond, with gradual introduction of age-appropriate complementary foods.

To achieve this goal, the association reminded the responsibility should not fall only upon mothers. "Everyone, including health care and education professionals, can and should help create an appropriate environment of awareness and support to encourage mothers to breastfeed."

This article appears in Taiwan Journal Oct. 16, 2008.

New law governs search for nuclear waste site

By June Tsai

This article was published in Taiwan Jouranl May 12, 2006. I post it here, at this time, just to remind us of the continuning plight of the Taos on Lanyu.


The Legislature passed legislation April 28 that governs how officials must go about locating a storage site for Taiwan's low-level radioactive waste. According to the new law, the government must obtain approval from residents of any area being considered as a disposal site for the thousands of barrels now stored on Orchid Island, as well as for additional waste being generated by the nation's three nuclear power plants. Residents must decide, via plebiscite, whether or not they will accept such a storage facility in their backyard before the central government can shortlist the site for final selection.

The law also stipulates that the administration responsible for operating the nuclear waste storage facility--which is the state-run utility Taiwan Power Co., or Taipower--must pay a maximum of US$156.5 million in compensatory remuneration to residents of whatever location is chosen as a depository for the waste. The law directs the Ministry of Economic Affairs to form a panel of independent experts and members of related agencies to identify potential waste disposal sites. This committee must propose at least two sites prior to final selection.

After the initial list of potential sites is released to the public, individuals, agencies and organizations may submit their opinions for discussion and debate for a period of six months. During this period of public discussion, the relevant county governments will hold a vote to let residents decide if they agree with the locations in question.

The regional plebiscite held for this purpose may exclude the application of related regulations of the nation's Referendum Act. If residents disapprove of their town for the site of the waste disposal, the site cannot be shortlisted again.

Only areas that are not affected by excessive earthquakes due to their proximity to fault lines, or to instability caused by other geological processes, can be considered as storage depots for the dangerous waste. Likewise, districts that have been designated environmentally protected areas should be excluded.

The plebiscite clause was initiated by Kuomintang legislator Justin Huang and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator Cheng Yun-peng. Huang said he was pleased to see that the version of the bill that incorporated his referendum mechanism passed, and added that all levels of government must abide by the law and proceed with the selection of a new storage site in a manner that is transparent and accountable to the public.

Officials of the DPP-led government have long been mulling over a regulation that would solve the controversial issue of where to dispose of the nation's low-level nuclear waste, which for over 20 years has been stored at a facility on Orchid Island, also known as Lanyu.

The country's first nuclear power plant went into operation in 1977. According to Niclas Ericsson writing in the Harvard Asia Quarterly, that same year, the government proposed building a factory to create jobs on Orchid Island, located 42 kilometers off the southeast coast of Taiwan proper. The island is inhabited primarily by members of the Yami aboriginal ethnic group, also known as the Tao. Once the ROC Atomic Energy Council (AEC) completed construction in 1982, it was discovered that the facility was actually a storage site for nuclear waste. Since 1982, Taipower has been dumping its low-level nuclear waste there. The AEC handed managerial control of the facility over to Taipower in 1990 on the condition that the waste be relocated elsewhere by the end of 2002.

Since the 1980s, the Yami have been appealing to the government to remove the waste from their land, staging protests and sit-ins to let the public know about their cause.

During the presidential campaign of 2000, Chen Shui-bian promised the residents of Orchid Island that, if elected president, he would have the waste removed by 2002.

Taiwan's Central News Agency quoted a local politician as saying that many residents of Orchid Island actually would not mind keeping the waste storage facility right where it is. As compensation for putting up with the nuclear waste stored on Lanyu, Taipower provides free electricity and health insurance payments, as well as other monetary compensation, to the residents of the economically depressed area. If the waste were removed, few people would be able to afford such amenities. The politician in question made the comments on condition of anonymity.

Meanwhile, long-term observers of the anti-nuclear waste movement on the tiny island deplore the situation facing the island's inhabitants.

"It is difficult to oppose nuclear energy, especially on remote Orchid Island," said Ho Tsung-hsun, secretary-general of Taiwan Environmental Protection Union. He explained that many residents feel they have to make compromises because of the social and financial disadvantages they face.

Taipower confirmed that, since 2003, its waste management personnel have been inspecting and refurbishing the nuclear waste storage bins in preparation for removing them from the island. Of the 97,672 barrels of nuclear waste being stored on Orchid Island, 8,684 have been inspected and prepared. The job is expected to take until 2010.

Huang's constituency is in Taitung County, under whose jurisdiction Orchid Island falls. He said he welcomed passage of the bill but was absolutely opposed to having any more radioactive waste stored in his constituency. The government has long been eyeing parts of Dawu Township of the same county as an alternative to the Orchid Island storage facility.

Land-rights debate follows aborigines' conviction

A pedestrian passes the "husband and wife" trees on the unpaved road connecting the Smangus tribe with a nearby cypress forest June 24, 2006. (CNA)



By June Tsai

Three aborigines from the Smangus tribe in Hsinchu County were found guilty of theft April 18 for attempting to remove the trunk of a tree that fell during a 2005 typhoon blocking the remote tribe's only connection with the outside world. The three members of the Atayal ethnic group filed an appeal with the Taiwan High Court, which began hearing the case May 29. The incident has evolved into a controversy regarding the legal status of traditional aboriginal territories.

Amin Yosyo, Kokwang Kumay and Sangas Icyeh were each sentenced to six months in prison and fined around US$5,000 for violating the Forestry Act. The Hsinchu District Court verdict cited Article 52 of the act, which metes out penalties for "burglary of primary forest products or forest byproducts."

The Smangus trio pleaded not guilty, saying they were carrying out a resolution to remove the tree trunk that was made at a village meeting. In a May 1 statement posted on a Smangus blog accompanying launch of a public petition, the villagers accused police and Forestry Bureau staff of stealing resources from within the tribe's traditional territory.

It also outlined villagers' version of events. This was that the September 2005 typhoon caused a landslide, which blocked the road connecting Smangus with the nearest township, a three-hour drive away. Those residents sent to undertake repairs at the village meeting's behest found a fallen beech tree under the mud. They moved this to the side of the road. A month later, villagers discovered that Forestry Bureau staff had sawn the beech into pieces and transported them away, leaving the lower section of trunk behind. One week after that, the trio of tribesmen were appointed to bring back the remaining part, to be used to decorate the village. While doing so, they were apprehended by patrolling police and later put on trial.

The position maintained by the police and the Forestry Bureau under the Council of Agriculture, as stated in the court verdict, was that the fallen tree had been deemed national property. When the defendants attempted to transport it to their village, this constituted an offense under Article 52 of the Forestry Act. Since the site of the incident was about 12 kilometers from the village, the defendants' appeal to Article 15 of the same act--which stated that aboriginal people may take forest products located in their traditional territories for traditional needs--was invalid.

"Smangus people do everything in accordance with 'gaga,' the traditional code, and universal ethics. We also hold village meetings to deal with public affairs on the basis of the Tribal Treaty," the Smangus statement claimed. "The Smangus people have lived on this land for more then 20 generations. It is also our living here that helps protect the environment. Making the best use of windfall timber and other natural resources is the right and proper thing to do, and should not be compared to stealing."

Calling the verdict "unacceptable," the villagers were determined to take their fight to the highest legal body. They held a traditional ceremony May 7 to erect a stone tablet claiming authority over forests in their traditional territory and barring those they described as "Forestry Bureau staff and the police who do not abide by 'gaga'" from entering the area.

A meeting convened in Smangus May 19 and 20 to launch Pinhaban, a campaigning alliance, was attended by representatives of other Atayal villages as well as those from other aboriginal groups. The alliance said the state was ignorant of aboriginal culture and customs. "We have profound relationships with our traditional territories, relationships that are far beyond the understanding of Forestry Bureau staff," Yawiy Maray, chieftain of the Bubul tribe in Nantou County, claimed in the joint statement. The alliance asked for apologies from the state, demanding it right the wrongs done to the Smangus people and return of the beech trunk stolen by the Forestry Bureau, the joint statement continued.

"The ruling was a result of selective use of ROC legislation," Lahuy Icyeh, son of the Smangus chieftain and brother of one of the defendants, asserted May 25. He said that, in addition to emphasizing Article 52 of the Forestry Act over Article 15, the court seemed to exclude consideration of the 2005 Aboriginal Basic Act, which gave indigenous people the right to use resources within their traditional territories or conservation areas for nonprofit purposes.

Hsinchu prosecutors had sought to close the case by asking the three villagers to plead guilty and each pay a US$330 fine, Lahuy said. "It is not a question of money. The rights and dignity of the whole community cannot be bought with mere money," he said.

There was an overlap between national forestry land and traditional Atayal territory, Kuo Wu-sheng, head of the Forestry Bureau's Hsinchu office, said May 25. Kuo stressed that Article 15 of the Forestry Act stated that regulations relating to location, timing and choice of crops to be harvested in conservation areas should be made by the Forestry Bureau in conjunction with local aboriginal representatives. "Since these regulations have not yet been drawn up, we acted in accordance with current laws," Kuo claimed.

Aborigines should not be victims of indolence by the legislative and executive branches of government, Lahuy said, pointing out that, according to the ABA, regulations should be made, amended or abolished in accordance with the basic act within three years of its going into effect, a deadline which would be up soon.

The judiciary should not refuse to acknowledge aborigines' rights to collect and use forestry products just because the legislative process was delayed, the Cabinet-level Council of Indigenous Peoples stated in a May 4 press release, adding that it regretted that protection of indigenous peoples' rights to their lands was still neglected by Taiwan's judicial practices.

"We have become thieves on our own land," the Pinhaban alliance stated, "while the state and big businesses have unscrupulously destroyed the forest and exploited its resources, causing Nature to fight back with successive disasters." The alliance held a demonstration in Taipei May 30 aimed at reclaiming honor and rights.



This article is published in Taiwan Journal May 31, 2007.

Journeying toward autonomy with the Saisiyat

A volunteer explains the ballot to a voter participating in a Saisiyat Assembly election held in Wufong Township, Hsinchu County March 2. (Courtesy of Ken Chih-you)



By June Tsai

Years spent campaigning for the preservation of tribal social structures and traditions resulted in the enactment of the Aboriginal Basic Act in 2005. Since then, aboriginal groups around Taiwan have been taking the lead by setting up local assemblies to establish a working framework ahead of complete self-governance. By adopting a bicameral representative system, resolutions concerning all aspects of aboriginal society can be effectively implemented, with the functioning assemblies ensuring equal relationships exists between the country's indigenous minorities and the central government. Taiwan Journal staff writer June Tsai reports.

Members of the Saisiyat aboriginal group braved cold weather to cast ballots in their tribal village of Da-ai in Wufong Township, Hsinchu County March 2. Many of the voters were returning from faraway cities to elect representatives to the lower house of the Hsinchu Saisiyat Assembly. It was another landmark act by the tribe, coming on the heels of last year's formation of the upper house. There was still much to be done, however, before every article of the 2005 Aboriginal Basic Act was realized, autonomy activists claimed.

Concentrated in the mountainous areas of Hsinchu and in the neighboring county of Miaoli, the Saisiyat is one of the smallest of Taiwan's 14 indigenous tribes, with a population of 7,000. Up to 90 percent of eligible voters among the 1,700 Hsinchu Saisiyat--around 800 people--participated in the poll, according to Obay a awi, a Saisiyat activist.

The March election was a culmination of efforts to introduce a modern, bicameral representative system to the indigenous tribe. The upper house of the Saisiyat Assembly, established in August 2007, is comprised of elders recommended by each and every clan based on family names. These elders assume the position of speaker in a rotational system. The lower house, whose seats are allocated according to the size of each family, is made up of 35 popularly elected members, including two seats reserved for women and two for younger members of the tribe. Five extra seats are available for interested parties from the public, private and religious sectors.

Encouraged by the Hsinchu Saisiyat, the upper house of the Miaoli Saisiyat Assembly was also formed in early March, with an election scheduled to take place soon. The two assemblies will be integrated by the end of this year, said Ken Chi-you, another Hsinchu Saisiyat activist responsible for election affairs.

The groundbreaking move by the Saisiyat was made in accordance with the Aboriginal Basic Act that stated the government must safeguard the status of Taiwan's aborigines and grant self-rule to each tribe, being regarded as the best way to protect the rights and heritage of the island's indigenous peoples. It also stipulated the central government must earmark budgets for that purpose, while requiring agencies to make and amend related laws to help achieve the goal within three years of the law being enacted.

The basic act was designed to pave the way for realizing an agreement that was signed in 1999 by then-presidential candidate Chen Shui-bian to ensure an equal partnership between the Han Chinese majority and the indigenous minority. Chen reconfirmed his intention to stand by the document when elected as a president in 2000.

Since 2005, there has been limited progress regarding supplementary legislation, with the exception of a law governing the collective management of resources in aboriginal areas being enacted in December 2007. A number of draft bills have been put to the Legislature for consideration, such as those recognizing aboriginal land and sea territories and protecting traditional indigenous knowledge of biological diversity, but they are still being reviewed. However, a draft bill on the indigenous autonomous areas, which the Cabinet-level Council of Indigenous Peoples proposed in 2003, was nowhere close to being read in the Legislature. CIP Minister Icyang Parod said recently that around 10 laws needed to first be formulated or amended, and that the council was working hard to see them get through.

In reality, Taiwan's indigenous peoples seem to be already one step ahead of the state in working toward their self-rule. The Thao established its ethnic assembly in 2005, with the Pinuyumayan doing so earlier this year. The Tsou, whose leaders founded a tribal council 10 years ago, established a preparatory committee for the establishment of an assembly in 2006. Moreover, the Bunun is presently seeking advice from the Saisiyat on how to form its own representative institution. "We need to prepare ourselves for self-rule, instead of waiting for the law on indigenous autonomous areas to be materialized," Ken said.

Insufficient aboriginal representation, hence participation, in the government's policy-making system has become a concern for city-educated aboriginal members. In the Legislature, six of the 113 seats are reserved for aboriginal lawmakers: three for "plains aborigines" and three for "mountain aborigines." However, this demarcation of constituencies does not reflect the makeup or the ethnic distinctiveness of each indigenous group. According to activists, this division specifically disadvantages the Saisiyat tribe because the Hsinchu Saisiyat are categorized as "mountain aborigines" and the Miaoli Saisiyat as "plains aborigines." As a result, no Saisiyat has ever been able to win a legislative seat.

Moreover, the influence of the greater political environment also pushed the Saisiyat toward setting up its own assembly. The country's two major parties concentrate so much time on partisan interests that autonomy-related bills are progressing very slowly through the Legislature. Yet, what worried Obay a awi more was the fact that partisanship had even infiltrated tribal politics and created divisions. Those concerns prompted a younger generation of urban intelligentsia to communicate with village elders and community members about self-rule. It was hoped that the process of founding the assembly could help people transcend the existing partisanship and put the Saisiyat community first.

"In fact, self-rule has been a reality for the Saisiyat for several hundred years," Ken said. The activist, who has spent 13 years documenting development in Taiwan's various aboriginal communities, went on to explain that many tribes had preserved their specific social structures, rituals, social norms and ways of life despite living under numerous regimes over the years. "The same is true for even the Amis, who are thought to be the tribe that has assimilated the most into Taiwanese society."

However, the impact of different ruling bodies in Taiwan's history, from the colonial Japanese to the Nationalist government, and society's rapid modernization has put enormous pressure on aboriginal groups striving to preserve their cultures and heritages in this modern age. "We are therefore aiming to make use of today's democratic techniques to help preserve our traditional social structure and to meet the democratic institution of the government halfway," Ken said.

Having studied parliamentary systems in various Western countries, these Saisiyat activists believed the bicameral system could serve their purpose well. The upper house of the Saisiyat Assembly is thus designed to keep in line with the long-standing collective decision-making process of clan elders within the community. The lower house, on the other hand, is set to facilitate communication between the whole community and the government on policies and matters concerning the people.

Resolutions proposed by the lower house need to be approved by the upper house before the secretary office of the lower house can put them into practice. The lower house implements decisions made by the upper house as well as carrying out all civic affairs concerning the tribe, such as education, social welfare, land management, development of tribal industry and maintaining effective communication channels with the government and other indigenous peoples. The upper house is mainly responsible for ceremonial affairs, including the biennial Pasta'ai ceremony.

"Examining all the aboriginal policies made by the central government, I must say they are quite progressive. The problem lies in their implementation," Ken pointed out. "From Taipei to the tribal villages, the way is long enough to dilute whatever inherent good there was in the policy," he added, referring to the amount of bureaucracy involved. "The government cannot expect immediate feedback on policies from the village-based aborigines, and we in our turn have no way to express what we need," he said. "Active participation of the aboriginal assembly will help prevent the government at any level from running into difficulties when it comes to policy implementation, therefore avoiding resources being wasted."

Speaking to Miaoli tribespeople March 30 about the Hsinchu Saisiyat's experiences, Obay a awi said: "You will have doubts about the success of such a project, just as I often did. But, let's pose our questions and let everyone discuss them. Each conclusion or resolution we reach will eventually turn into self-power. Once our power is demonstrated, the government cannot ignore our opinions while making policies," he said, explaining what the assembly could do to enhance the tribe's interests and help achieve eventual self-rule. "By setting up the assembly, we are unifying among ourselves to make a position."

Fighting to gain the right to their traditional territory and to the use of its resources is a realistic issue for the Saisiyat and other aborigines, as the land issue has much to do with the development, even survival, of an indigenous group. The Saisiyat people hope to establish a far-reaching partnership, via the representative body, with the government as a way to achieve mutual benefits. The tribe has already succeeded in signing the first-ever cooperative agreement with a government agency, setting up a collective management mechanism with the Shei-Pa National Park Administration in November 2006.

"Aboriginal rights movements now take place within the tribe, not on the street," Ken asserted, referring to the bottom-up crafting of the self-ruling representative system as a way to negotiate with the government.

The activist went on to cite the case of the Cree of the Eeyou Istchee in Canada as a model. For 30 years, the Cree fought in courts and made pleas to international organizations regarding the Quebec government's hydroelectric power project within the tribe's traditional territory.

In the end, the Cree succeeded in signing an agreement concerning a new relationship with the Government of Quebec in 2002, and in February 2008, with the Government of Canada. Under the agreement, a dispute-settling mechanism was set up, and the Canadian government was also required to earmark a total of 1.4 billion Canadian dollars to assist in development of self-rule for the tribe. Ken stated that this was the way the Saisiyat could also follow.

As regards to funding, any money needed for the establishment of the Saisiyat Assembly has so far only come from the tribe itself. The tribe had little choice but to finance the costs itself, as laws under the basic act have yet to be amended to permit financial assistance from the government, according to Ken. "Nonetheless, we will show our determination to the greater society and the government by helping ourselves first," he said.

"This road [to self-rule] is long and winding, and it is very difficult to walk on. Yet we have to do it for the long-term development of the Saisiyat people."

This article is published in Taiwan Journal May 1, 2008.