The opposition parties are now planning to recall President Chen Shui-bian
Careful examination of the law, however, reveals that it is extremely difficult for the opposition parties to recall Chen at this moment since the case is tangled with complicated political issues. If the opposition parties do not think before they act, they will only embarrass themselves.
First of all, according to Article 69 of the Public Officials Election and Recall Law
Thus, in accordance with that law, Chen shall not be recalled within a year of his inauguration on May 20. Since the law is "non-retrospection" (
Think about it. Even regular public officials' rights are protected by law. How can the president's and the vice president's rights not to be so protected?
I believe, therefore, that even if the legislators did pass a motion to recall the president in the Legislative Yuan, it is questionable whether the Central Election Commission (中央選舉委員會) would accept such a case. If Chen and his party members were to request a Council of Grand Justices' (大法官會議) interpretation of the recall's legitimacy, moreover, I don't believe the opposition parties would have a case.
Second, the president and the vice president are the heads of state. Their posts require stability so that they can serve the people without distraction. In fact, the presidents and vice presidents of many countries are endowed with rights of immunity (
Taiwan's opposition legislators, however, have chosen to recall Chen only for some abstract or ambiguous reasons, with subjective judgements toward Chen's personality and his performance as well. As a result, of course, it is unfair to recall the president, who was directly elected by the people of Taiwan, only for some vague reason.
From a political perspective, although the KMT and the PFP are working closely together to push for Chen's recall in order to overturn the DPP government. Each of these two parties has its own axe to grind.
If the KMT chose to impeach the premier, it might lose many of its current seats and become a minority party in the legislature after the next year's election while the PFP greatly expandsits seats. That's why the KMT has given up the impeachment and has chosen to work with the PFP to push for a recall. In the event that Chen really did step down, however, I believe KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) would lose the presidential election that would follow, leaving PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) the only one to benefit. No wonder Soong was so eager recently to make peace with Lien.
According to Additional Article 3 of the Constitution, the premier shall be appointed by the president without the consent of the legislature. Since the president is directly elected by the voters of Taiwan and needs to be responsible for all the people and Premier Chang Chun-hsiung
To be more specific, if the opposition legislators chose to recall Chen to show their distrust of him, they would also be showing their distrust of the premier, which certainly must lead to an impeachment of the premier and a legislative election.
In such a situation, the president can therefore dissolve the legislature under the Additional Article 2 of the Constitution, forcing the opposition legislators to request an interpretation by the grand justices as to whether distrust of the president equals distrust of the premier.
The interpretation which the legislator's would wish for, however, that distrust of the president does not equal distrust of the premier, would not materialize, since it would make no sense. As a result, the KMT would suffer badly if the president actually chose to dissolve the legislature.
Some so-called senior constitutional experts in Taiwan have stressed that the president can be recalled if the majority in the legislature wishes it. Is this really true? Perhaps they should take advice from our young constitutional experts.
Lee Hong-hsi is a law professor at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past