'Peace' bill is a recipe for disaster

`[The cross-strait peace advancement bill] would amount to a declaration of war by the legislature against the executive, and by no means is this a situation that Taiwanese want to see.'

Although the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has put a lot of effort into negotiating with the pan-blue camp to solve the controversy over the cross-strait peace advancement bill, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) are proceeding with it. If this bill is eventually approved, it will have a serious impact on Taiwan.

As this is a matter of great importance, and also because I believe that most people are not even aware of the contents and the potential impact of the bill, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), the government agency in charge of supervising cross-strait policy, would like to take this opportunity to explain the matter in detail.

First, the bill will serve to legalize the "one China" principle. The major bone of contention between Taipei and Beijing is just this principle, for Beijing believes that Taiwan is part of the People's Republic of China, which most Taiwanese find unacceptable.

Furthermore, Article 1 of the bill stipulates acknowledgement of (that is, to bring into force) the "1992 consensus." This is unfortunately tantamount to helping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) force the nation to accept the "one China" principle and enacting a subsidiary law to Beijing's "Anti-Secession" Law. In short, the legislation would put the nation at risk. In addition, ideological commitment in regard to this issue is so uncompromising that use of any legislation to restrain discussion will only lead to severe political unrest. We should seek to avoid such a thorny situation when dealing with China.

Second, the bill is obviously unconstitutional. The "cross-strait peace committee" that would be established under the bill would push ahead with major cross-strait affairs and take the initiative in negotiating with Beijing. That is, the bill would enable the legislature to empower another organ to handle cross-strait issues, a job already being performed by the MAC, and usurp the rights of the executive. This is a clear violation of the checks and balances between the executive and the legislature.

Third, the bill violates a bylaw of the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), which was ratified by the legislature when KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was serving as vice chairman of the MAC. Three years ago, the bylaw was even amended by the governing and opposition parties to lay out regulations relating to cross-strait affairs, and it is now regarded as the most important guiding principle on the cross-strait issue.

However, the bill and the legislative drive to lead cross-strait affairs directly contradict the aforementioned act as well as the guiding principles relating to cross-strait policy.

Fourth, the bill is a violation of democratic principles. The main thrust of the bill, as it claims, is to prevent the government from slipping up when formulating policy and to form a committee within the legislature to represent "the Taiwanese" in negotiations with Beijing. However, Taiwan is a nation that already holds democratic elections and periodically elects a president.

Legislators, chosen by the electorate, are there to supervise the operations of the government. Enacting such a bill will mandate the Legislative Yuan to dictate cross-strait policy, a flagrant violation of democratic principles. Furthermore, Article 7 of the bill stipulates that government agencies throughout the nation and the general public must comply with the resolutions proposed by a cross-strait peace committee.

Whoever to enforce the resolutions will be subject to investigation by the judiciary and the supervisory arms of the government. Such a committee could simultaneously wield executive, legislative and judicial powers, creating a monster depriving people of the right to choose. This would clearly damage Taiwan's democratic achievements.

Fifth, divisions between the pan-blue and pan-green camps will cause even further deterioration. If the legislature is able to set up a cross-strait peace committee and wrest the right to formulate cross-strait policy from the executive, it could also adopt a similar approach or pass a similar law and usurp the roles of other government agencies, turning the legislature into an autocratic organ. This would amount to a declaration of war by the legislature against the executive, and by no means is this a situation that Taiwanese want to see.

Faced such an unstable political climate, the Taiwanese people must put aside their ideological differences and jointly ensure the well-being of the nation, rather than engage in an independence-unification dispute that could trigger more political unrest.

However, as the legislature is eventually going to take a vote on the cross-strait peace advancement bill, I feel responsible for bringing this issue to the public's attention and explaining the consequences we will have to face if it is passed by the legislature.

I also would like to urge people to understand that this bill is unlikely to bring about peace, and will only cause more political disputes and unrest.

Joseph Wu is chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council.

TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG