The National Assembly recently passed amendments to the Constitution, and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has announced that he will push for a second stage of constitutional reform in order to create a new constitution that is in step with the times and a better fit for Taiwan's situation.
While discussing whether or not this second stage should be implemented, many political scientists are proposing the adoption of a Cabinet system. This proposal imagines that amending the Constitution to establish a strong Cabinet system would restore the legitimacy of the Constitution, allowing that document's problems to be resolved in one swift stroke. Media reports on the superiority of the Cabinet system make it seem as if that would be the only way to resolve Taiwan's constitutional issues.
Political scientists often hold up the superiority of the Cabinet system based on a theoretical basis. Their reasons are that a Cabinet system would avoid the constitutional deadlock created under the presidential system as a result of the refusal of the executive branch and the legislative branch to compromise, the lack of competition in a presidential system and presidential despotism. They also say it would establish a neutral head of state and set up a mechanism for cross-party cooperation.
The British experience is often cited as an example. But if we look at the situation in some of the countries that have emulated the British system, we may have to reconsider the question of whether the Cabinet system is really so superior.
When Japan, in accordance with its new Constitution, set up a Cabinet system after World War II, the British Cabinet system was its blueprint. The practical experience over the past 60 years, however, has shown that Japan cannot rid itself of political corruption.
In the past, when the Liberal Democrats all but dominated Japanese politics, Cabinet posts were distributed based on the strength of the different factions and parliamentary seats were distributed according to age and seniority. There was even an unwritten rule that members of parliament who had served five terms were qualified for a Cabinet post, while those who had served two terms were qualified for a deputy Cabinet post. This practice continued even under coalition governments -- the only difference being that it now applied to the different parties instead of to the different factions. What in theory was a beautiful example of cross-party cooperation was in fact a matter of no-holds-barred logrolling.
After its independence, Malaysia set up a constitutional monarchy with a symbolic head of state and a Cabinet system modeled on the British one. Forty years on, however, Malaysia is still an authoritarian state, and there are often reports in the international media on its human rights situation.
After 40 years, the Malaysian parliament was under total control of the ruling party and could not fulfill any of its monitoring duties. If the divisions of power are sidestepped under a Cabinet system, this can lead to one man achieving even greater power than under a presidential system.
Cyprus also used Britain as a model when it set up a constitutional framework with a Cabinet system following its independence. In consideration of differences between the minority population of Turks and the Greeks, there was proportional distribution of Cabinet posts and parliamentary seats. This should have paved the way for political cooperation.
Cyprus, however, has been in a state of domestic turmoil since 1963, which caused Turkey to invade the northern part of the island in 1974 and divide it in two. Given these practical examples, one can only be skeptical about clinging to the idea of the Cabinet system's superiority.
The implementation and workings of democracy are not determined by the type of constitutional framework -- be it presidential or Cabinet-style -- but rather by politicians' respect for the Constitution and the public's confidence in the document. Such respect and confidence will only come about if the Constitution is based on the power of people.
The inclusion of the referendum in the latest round of constitutional revision guarantees that in the future, constitutional politics will be based on popular power. Academics may flat-out reject such examples of the British system or inflexibly and stubbornly stick to pushing the idea of its superiority. But if they do so, rather than re-evaluating the constitutional system from the perspective of popular power and Taiwan's current situation, they will ignore the bigger principles while focusing too much on superficial details.
Yeh Hong-ling is a student in the Graduate School of Political Science at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis 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