We have seen a lot of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), as have legislators.
They have been grappling with it, and each other as a result, throughout the seventh Legislative Yuan session. So much so that the process has spilled over into a post-recess special legislative session, meeting the same fate as the amendments to the Local Government Act (地方制度法), which had been passed in the previous session earlier this year. So once again, we have the spectacle of legislators from both parties reduced to scrapping in the nation’s legislature playing on our TV screens, yet more ammunition for the foreign press to use to gawk in wonder at what passes for politics in Taiwan.
Legislators on both sides seem to view parliament as a battlefield on which to wage their political warfare. Far be it for them to actually engage in rational political debate in the interests of arriving at a satisfactory conclusion. We would not, I think, be overly remiss in wishing they would conduct themselves in a way more suited to the spirit of democracy. Nor, I feel, could we blame ourselves for having strong reservations about how the special legislative sessions have been handled. A glaring example of this was the session carried out in the absence of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators after they walked out last month. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) took advantage of the empty seats, seizing the opportunity to unilaterally rush through a number of controversial laws in a clear show of their disdain for the democratic process. It’s quite depressing, really.
The fact is that these sessions should only be called under special circumstances or in emergencies. According to Articles 68 and 69 of the Constitution, the legislature is to meet for two sessions every year and special sessions can only be called for two reasons — the first when the president seeks a consultative session; the second when a quarter or more legislators agree to it. In the entire history of constitutional government in Taiwan, there have only been 13 occasions on which a special session has been called. The first was in 1951, followed by another the next year, and then there were the politically tumultuous years between 2000 and 2008, when the DPP was in power. This period saw no less than eight sessions. That leaves three for the recent seventh session, with another slated for this month. This is a record number of special sessions.
In our capacity as monitors to the legislature, it falls on us to ask: Who gave legislators the right to drag their heels during normal sessions just so they can abuse special sessions to play catch-up? The legislature is playing with fire here, risking the whole edifice of constitutional government going up in flames. One wrong move and we could have a constitutional crisis on our hands.
Even though the KMT allowed the existence of the Young China Party and the China Democratic Socialist Party, both minor, legally recognized political parties, during the Martial Law period, they have once again, even in the 21st century, overseen a transition to a virtual one-party legislature. This outrageous state of affairs is a slap in the face to the constitutional government system that took so long to build. One piece of legislation that was passed in such conditions was the Rural Revitalization Act (農村再生條例), which encountered all kinds of problems the moment it was passed. If that ran into problems, one can only imagine what’s going to happen to the planned amendments to the demarcations of legislative constituencies that the KMT still wants to slip through in the next special session.
What with the ruling and opposition parties being at each others’ throats, it is going to be difficult to see any budgets and laws passed. These special sessions are on shaky ground vis-a-vis our constitutional democracy. The public will have to keep its eye on the people who are supposed to be representing them in the Legislative Yuan.
We ask the DPP not to withdraw from the special session. We also call on the ruling and opposition parties to work together and not get distracted by legislation other than the ECFA. It is important to break the mold of the failed special session. Democracy is still quite fragile in this country, and we must handle it with care.
Ku Chung-hwa is chairman of Citizens’ Congress Watch.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Ahead of US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) meeting today on the sidelines of the APEC summit in South Korea, an op-ed published in Time magazine last week maliciously called President William Lai (賴清德) a “reckless leader,” stirring skepticism in Taiwan about the US and fueling unease over the Trump-Xi talks. In line with his frequent criticism of the democratically elected ruling Democratic Progressive Party — which has stood up to China’s hostile military maneuvers and rejected Beijing’s “one country, two systems” framework — Lyle Goldstein, Asia engagement director at the US think tank Defense Priorities, called
A large majority of Taiwanese favor strengthening national defense and oppose unification with China, according to the results of a survey by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). In the poll, 81.8 percent of respondents disagreed with Beijing’s claim that “there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China,” MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) told a news conference on Thursday last week, adding that about 75 percent supported the creation of a “T-Dome” air defense system. President William Lai (賴清德) referred to such a system in his Double Ten National Day address, saying it would integrate air defenses into a
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS