Print

Mail

wiki links

EDITORIAL: In defense of a dignified executive

The passing of a legislative amendment that restores Cabinet authority over membership of the National Communications Commission (NCC) is good news indeed.

When the NCC formed early last year it became the focus of a power struggle between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-controlled executive and a legislature dominated by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).

Perhaps nostalgic for their traditional control over not only most individual media outlets but also the previous media regulator -- the Government Information Office -- the KMT and its allies put a tremendous amount of time and resources into turning the NCC into an offshoot of the legislature, courtesy of regulations that gave parties the right to appoint NCC members based on their legislative numbers.

But then the pan-blue camp ran into a brick wall when the Council of Grand Justices declared the NCC legislation unconstitutional.

Since then, a grace period has allowed the NCC to continue with its work, which -- sadly but predictably -- included politicized decisions on media ownership.

But the grace period finished at the end of this month, and the legislature was forced to act. With the amendment, the executive will nominate NCC members before the list is approved by the legislature -- together with explicit restrictions on political party membership, which is reasonable.

It is hoped that this reversal will discourage the pan-blue camp from using its legislative majority to prey on and manipulate other government agencies, such as the Central Election Commission.

It might be argued -- as the KMT has done -- that Cabinet appointments influence agencies in a way that is unfair and undemocratic. This is strange reasoning, because a government has the responsibility to shape policies and their execution. And the fact that executive agencies are accountable to the legislature for their actions means that out-and-out bias can be placed on the record and dealt with.

The KMT has a good chance of winning the presidential election in March, and with such a victory would come the same privileges and responsibilities -- including accountability -- that the DPP government has had over the last seven-and-a-half years.

Presumably, at that time, the pan-blue camp would cease complaining of executive bias because the executive would be theirs. And, quite possibly, less able minds in the pan-green camp will take up the role of complaining about unfair executive practices.

The answer, surely, is to develop and defend a system of executive duties that is accountable, transparent and secure enough to withstand attacks based on partisan interests and not out of concern for good governance.

This solution relies heavily on the goodwill and mutual respect of people on both sides of the political divide. Such behavior is in short supply for the moment, but once the fuss over the legislative elections dies down, the presidential candidates will have the chance to address what it is that constitutes good governance -- regardless of which party is in power.

And any candidate that makes light of fundamental questions such as these should be very closely questioned on their presidential ambitions.
This story has been viewed 1182 times.