President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has spoken of a return to the constitutional framework to resolve the current political standoff but he has said little about what steps should be taken to achieve this. Yesterday's summit meeting of opposition leaders resulted in a six-point wish list (see page 1) of substantive steps that opposition parties believe are needed to bring about that end.
The present fracas is, of course, the result of executive and legislative powers being in the hands of different parties. A solution to this therefore needs the working out of a modus vivendi that is acceptable across the political spectrum which would allow the business of government, currently paralyzed as it is, to resume. It might also involve giving serious heed to constitutional reform that would reduce the chances of this mess happening again.
The solution to the current problems sought by the opposition parties yesterday was the reduction of the president's powers to appoint the premier, so that in times of an opposition legislative majority, the legislature's approval would be needed for the appointment of a premier. The idea here is that a premier approved by the legislature is unlikely to face the kind of confrontation that now threatens Premier Chang Chun-hsiung (
The problem with the opposition parties' stance on this issue however is that they are not being bold enough in seeking a solution. There are at least two example of governments where executive and legislative authority can be divided, namely the US and France.
In the US, Congress might be controlled by one party and the presidency by another. Here however, the president's power to veto legislation means that neither side can get anything accomplished without compromise with its opponent. Of course total gridlock is possible, but only at the risk of the voters' severe displeasure.
In France on the other hand, which has a political system more analogous to Taiwan's, it is also possible for a president to be from one party when the National Assembly is dominated by another. For Taiwan, there is a constitutional solution to the problem: The president, rather like the Queen of England, has to ask the majority party to take the premiership and form a government. If this was specified in Taiwan's Constitution then the current problem would never have arisen.
The debate over Taiwan's Constitution has erupted in recent years because the system simply was not designed for the pressures of a multi-party democratic government. But sometimes it seems that Taiwan's politicians have been similarly ill-designed. Chen has a weak mandate and must cut his policy coat according to the rather small bolt of electoral cloth voters gave him. He has to either compromise with the opposition parties, or else use the bully pulpit of the presidency to sway public opinion which in turn would affect opposition policy. The fact is that currently he has done neither, but tried, when frustrated by the legislature, to ride roughshod over the niceties of the Constitution, whatever its defects, and act in what is arguably an illegal manner. For Chen to agree to seek a constitutional solution to the current problems, to show some respect for the rule of law would go some way to patching up the current situation. And he has to realize that that solution will not be found unless he compromises.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry