As usual, the last day of the legislative session saw many bills being approved at the last minute -- among them the Organic Standard Law of the Central Government Agencies (
Although it had been a campaign platform and the intention of President Chen Shui-bian (
In view of the way that the pan-blues have been harassing the Chen administration whenever the chance arises, it is hard to not suspect that they have been cooperative in the downsizing because they saw this as a way to reduce or confine the executive branch's power. This view is confirmed when one takes into consideration how they managed to slip into the draft the provision that requires legislative approval for appointment of the five independent agencies' heads.
Giving such a power to the Legislative Yuan presents several problems. First, the Constitution explicitly gives the president the power to appoint the premier without the approval of the Legislative Yuan. The intention is obviously for the legislature to keep its hands off of nominations and appointments of Executive Yuan personnel. Under the circumstances, it just doesn't make sense that the appointment of the heads of any departments under the Executive Yuan, regardless of whether they are independent agencies, would require legislative approval.
Moreover, this is not a mere issue of unduly enlarging legislative power, but also an issue of a possible violation of the Constitution. Perhaps the pan-blue opposition dislikes the current checks and balances of power between the various government branches -- in particular, between the Legislative Yuan and the Executive Yuan. Yet until a consensus is reached through public debate with respect to the precise form of government that Taiwan should have -- for example, a pure presidential, Cabinet or other type of system -- it is irresponsible to disturb the current system in such piecemeal fashion. Any changes of this fundamental nature concerning governmental powers should be reserved for the comprehensive constitution re-engineering project proposed by Chen.
Quite obviously, the fact that the pan-blues currently enjoy a legislative majority and their continued refusal to accept the outcome of the presidential election -- casting the blame in part on the Central Election Commission -- had been what prompted them to push through a bill containing such a provision.
It is irresponsible for any political party or lawmaker to support any bill for reasons such as these. In enacting any law, they should be thinking about the long-term impact it could have on the government or the nation as a whole.
After all, what happens when the pan-blues come into power or no longer enjoy a legislative majority, which is a realistic possibility in view of their recent behavior?
Will they regret their actions and try to amend the law again then?
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.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US