The amendments put to vote by the National Assembly have been approved. All the political parties had voted in accordance with their declared positions of either opposing or supporting these amendments, fully living up to their promises to the voters.
As a result, the National Assembly has become a thing of the past, since one of the amendments was to abolish the assembly. In addition to expressing satisfaction, President Chen Shui-bian (
He also emphasized the fact that the abolishment of the National Assembly suggests that the conservative and rigid beliefs about the Constitution had been broken, and that the country was fully prepared for comprehensive amendments of the Constitution.
He expressed the hope that the opposition and ruling camps cast aside their differences and work together for a second time to complete the second phase of reform.
Before the National Assembly's approval of the amendment to the Constitution, all kind of disputes had led to talk about whether the amendment could be passed without a hitch, suggesting unpredictability about the final result. In the end, the parties proved to the people that they can live up to their promises, indicating that they can still be trusted by the people. This is indeed most encouraging.
As for the amendments' impacts on Taiwan's political developments, there are both up sides and down sides. An irreconcilable gap appears to still exist between ideals and reality. It is hard to conclude whether the design and operation of the existing political systems had been improved for the better. Further observation is required.
Regardless of the people's varying views about the accomplishments or faults of these amendments, Chen declared that they are only the beginning, rather than the end. According to Chen, he will appoint Presidential Office Secretary-General Yu Shyi-kun to facilitate and push for the organization of a constitutional and political reform committee, and to invite people from all sectors to work for a consensus over the scope and procedure of the second-phase of constitutional amendment in 2008.
The contents of the second phase of proposed reforms revealed by Chen do not involve territory, sovereignty or title of the country. Instead, they deal with the governmental system; trimming the government to three branches, supplemental measures for legislative reforms; the abolishment of the provincial government; lowering the voting age; abolishing the military conscription system; incorporating basic workers' rights into the Constitution; creating a chapter on Aboriginal rights; and strengthening human rights. In other words, the intention is to tailor and customize the Constitution -- which was founded on the concept of Greater-China framework -- to suit the practical needs of Taiwan.
Obviously the underlying ideals are far reaching and the reform goal is to deal with the predicaments that Taiwan currently faces yet must resolved. However, procedure-wise, these proposed amendments are destined for failure. We say this not because we disagree with Chen's ideals or because we hope that the amendments will fail.
First, according to the recently approved amendments to the Constitution, in the future, all amendments to the Constitution or constitutionally-defined territories of the country will require the following: A proposal endorsed by one-fourth of the Legislative Yuan members; the approval of the bill by three-fourths of the attending legislators; a quorum of three-fourths of the Legislative Yuan. These thresholds at the legislature are very high to begin with.
This is not to mention that the pan-green and pan-blue's two highly polarized camps have roughly around the same numbers of seats in the legislature. It is virtually impossible for a bill to amend the constitution to get approved there. Besides, even if the bill makes it through the legislature, now that the National Assembly no longer exists, amendments to the Constitution must be approved through referendum.
The threshold for approval is one-half of all the citizens with the right to vote. The voter turnout rate for this past National Assembly election was only 23 percent, leaving aside the issue of how many voted for parties in support of the amendments and how many for parties against.
In view of this, it is likely that even if all those who vote in the referendum vote in favor of amendments, there may not be enough votes for approval of the amendments. In the referendum over the arms purchase held at the same time with the presidential election last year, the same thing happened -- around 97 or 98 percent of those who voted in the referendum were in favor of the arms purchase, but enough for approval because it requires approval by 50 percent or more of all registered voters.
Under the circumstances, the odds of further amendments getting approved are very slim. No wonder that Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lin Cho-shui (林濁水) said that Article 12 of the amendments should not be called "article on constitutional amendment," since it in fact "bans"constitutional amendment by imposing such extremely high thresholds for amendments.
This article has officially declared that more controversial bills for amendment, such as those over the form or system of government, will not be approved. Therefore, the second phase of amendment to constitution faces serious bottleneck. Next, it is not only difficult for the second phase of amendment to be approved through a referendum. The bill could very well be killed and aborted prematurely in the legislature.
Therefore, after Chen made the proposal for a second phase of amendments, the pan-blue camp indicated strong opposition. In the future, with the reduction in the number of seats at the Legislative Yuan and the adoption of a new legislative system -- the "single-member district, two-vote system" -- a two-party system will begin to emerge in Taiwan. The smaller political parties will gradually decline.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the DPP will dominate the legislature. In particular, regardless of how voting districts are carved out, as the Constitution requires that every municipality and county shall have at least one seat, and that Aboriginals from the mountain areas and other areas shall respectively have three seats, each vote caste by a voter will carry different weight. Some less-populated and remote counties and municipalities traditionally support certain parties. The pan blue camp obviously has the most to gain from the constitutionals amendments.
Since the pan-blues have already indicated opposition against the second-phase of amendments, and it is unlikely for the pan-greens to have enough seats in the legislature to approve any amendments before 2008, all the hard work done for a second phase of amendments will most likely be in vain.
The constitutional amendment to reduce the number of legislative seat is the result of people's resentment of the chaos at the Legislative Yuan.
Actually, the US has a population of 327 million and only 435 members in the House of Representatives, and 100 in the Senate.
Taiwan has 23 million people and as many as 225 seats at the Legislative Yuan. There is indeed a need for reduction in number. However, is there a need to reduce by half? That is an issue that should be decided based on objective assessment and discussion, rather than spur of the moment resentment.
Furthermore, how to carve out single-member voting districts in a manner that will lessen the discrepancy in the weight of the votes and protect the rights of different ethnic groups and geographical groups, so as that the legislative election may more faithfully reflect the popular will, as well as how to overcome the high thresholds for constitutional amendments, these are all issues that need to be dealt with. In other words, this past amendment to the Constitution has produced a lot of side effects, compromising the accomplishments of the amendments and casting a shadow over the future political development of the country.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers