For party-state split, Chen should set example

I have always had a particular loathing of the one-party state -- especially the Leninist sort, which is totally antithetical to the principals of democratic government. The Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) both started life as Leninist-style political parties, and when the KMT retreated to Taiwan in 1949, it continued to follow this political model.

During the run-up to the 2000 presidential election, Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) said that he would not become chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). I could only applaud this move. But one year after taking office, Chen found that his policy to separate party and state was not going smoothly, so he proposed "synchronization of party and state" in which he would become party chairman.

I completely opposed this, and warned the DPP that it was in danger of becoming a Leninist party. No notice was taken of my warnings. But now, after winning a second term, Chen has proposed stepping down as party chairman.

At the third anniversary of the founding of the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), Chen departed from his prepared speech and said that he hoped the legislative speaker could be a person who served the whole people, rather than serving a political party. He said he hoped the future speaker would not participate in party affairs and would not be a member of a central standing committee or the central executive committee, or serve as vice chairman or chairman.

If the DPP win a majority in the year-end legislative elections then the Cabinet and legislature will be able to operate more normally. In this situation, if the speaker is able to rise above party politics and serve as an impartial official of the legislature, this will be a great blessing for the nation's people.

What Chen said is fully in accord with the principles of democracy. But for Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) there was criticism hidden between the lines. Wang responded by asking about Chen's own situation, since the president is also the chairman of the DPP.

KMT caucus whip Huang Teh-fu (黃德福) said Chen was like a thief calling out "Stop, thief!" He pointed out that Chen promised to step down as DPP chairman and said he would establish a separation of party and state, but has since served as chairman for many years. He said the problem was with Chen himself.

I have seldom agreed with these KMT heavyweights. But in this case the criticism they have leveled at Chen is deserved. Only by first stepping down as DPP chairman can Chen with a clear conscience demand that the legislative speaker renounce party office. If the country adopts a presidential system, then the political parties should be reduced to being election machines -- as in the US model -- with the president, speaker and other government officials such as the premier, ministers and even legislators all barred from holding concurrent party office.

Chen must establish a separation of party and state by first stepping down as DPP chairman and becoming a president for the whole people before he can demand that Wang step down from his position as KMT vice-chairman. The same goes for DPP Secretary-General Chang Chun-hsiung (張俊雄) if he is selected for an at-large legislative seat this year -- and if he seeks to become legislative speaker.

Whether this model of democratic practice is written into the law, or even incorporated into the Constitution, should be carefully considered. But separation of party and state is crucial to the development of constitutional government.

Chiou Chwei-liang is currently a visiting professor at Tamkang University.

Translated by Ian Bartholomew