On the last day of the third legislative session, the opposition launched a protest with the result that the frequent practice of a final late-night session aimed at rushing through motions and tidying up the legislative record came to naught: Not a single motion was passed.
Some people may look on this as a dark day for the legislature and condemn lawmakers for being lazy and neglecting their duties.
Indeed, from the perspective of nongovernmental legislative supervision, we demand that lawmakers work hard to draft laws beneficial to the country and the public.
However, greater concerns lie ahead. When the new legislative session starts, we could see greater interference in the legislature or the lawmaking body coming under the control of the party-state, stripping it of its role as a forum for rational debate and democratic checks and balances.
From a structural point of view, when President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) becomes the chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the fact that the KMT holds a three-quarters majority in the Legislative Yuan means that the party must shoulder the political task of carrying out the president’s wishes.
At that time, the logic of total power dictates that the party speed up passage of various laws and regulations to complement government policy and help the executive achieve its policy implementation goals.
KMT legislators are unlikely to voice opinions or views that contradict those of the president or the Cabinet. They are afraid that if they do so, they could jeopardize their chance of being nominated for reelection.
Legislators at large are likely to have even greater problems and difficulties to maintain their position.
By letting legislators handle the KMT chairmanship election campaign, Ma has revealed his determination to control the legislature. Whether or not Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) serves as deputy chairman is no longer important. Since there can only be one master, Ma’s successful incorporation of the legislature into his power base means that the room for independent political thinking by KMT lawmakers will shrink drastically.
From the perspective of the legislative agenda, the question is if the merger of legislative and executive power could really aid efficiency.
I am pessimistic and fear that opposition protests will become both more intense and more frequent. I say this because when it comes to cross-strait issues, the legislature is the opposition’s only remaining forum.
The KMT has to remember, however, that every time a major legal bill is blocked, that action will also indirectly weaken Ma’s authority. If the majority party chooses a tough approach and repeatedly resorts to voting by a show of hands, it will only highlight its domineering and foolhardy attitude, resulting in increased public support for the opposition.
The KMT should also remember that although the opposition holds less than one-quarter of the legislative seats, it represents 40 percent of all voters.
Opposition lawmakers will do all they can to voice their objections, and conflict between the two opposing camps will be difficult to avoid.
Unless Ma is willing to take a softer approach and use the legislature as a medium for initiating dialogue and reconciliation with the opposition, the dark days of the legislature are just about to begin.
Ku Chung-hwa is chairman of Citizen Congress Watch.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS