Representatives from Taiwan and China have just completed the second round of economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) talks in Taoyuan. The government has still not clarified the contents of the agreement, which will affect millions of Taiwanese. This seems to contradict the decision-making process of a democratic country and is very worrying.
If we look back at the earlier cross-strait agreements reached by Taiwan’s Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), we soon realize that such worries are well-founded.
The cross-strait air and sea transport agreements signed at the second round of the SEF-ARATS talks were submitted for legislative review because they required legal amendments. The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) attempts to use its majority to muscle through the changes drew protests from Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators and resulted in negotiations between the party caucuses. Nothing has happened since then, and the agreements came into effect without the required legal amendments.
At the third round of talks three agreements were signed, and although the legislature clamored for the right to substantial review of the agreements, a joint meeting of the legislative committees was dissolved because the legally stipulated threshold required for a resolution could not be reached. The committees never completed the review and so these three agreements also took effect by default.
The agreements signed at the fourth round of talks between the SEF and ARATS directly involved important national affairs and the rights and duties of citizens. The agreements were legally binding and should have been subject to legislative oversight. However, the 12 signed agreements and the meeting minutes came into effect before the legislature had completed a review or even been informed about their contents.
The ECFA will have a major impact on Taiwan’s future industrial development and blue-collar workers’ right to work. It is necessary that such an agreement be monitored by the legislature. Legislators shouldn’t just wave their party banners and shout slogans, they should properly monitor these agreements. Still, no one is willing to make the effort to carry out a true review or implement controls.
The DPP’s legislative caucus is requesting that the dissolved Advisory Group on Cross-Strait Affairs be reinstated. Legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) was apparently not opposed to the idea, but after the KMT expressed its opposition, he backed down, and this is unfortunate.
The legislature has the power to set up new committees based on need. An advisory group on cross-strait affairs could monitor cross-strait policy developments and requesting that the government evaluate the various policies. That could avoid a situation in which the division between several committees leads to a lack of oversight and overall evaluation. To facilitate the safe passage of agreements through Congress, the US government lets senators participate in negotiations or solicits their opinion. Allowing participation in the preparatory stages of a cross-strait agreement increases the chances of a smooth review process.
Giving the legislature monitoring power isn’t just a matter of conforming to democratic principles, it is also the law in Taiwan. Based on the Council of Grand Justices’ constitutional interpretation No. 520, the legislature and the Cabinet share the decision-making power. This means that the legislature should not only be given formal participation in the ECFA process, but that it should also exercise substantial oversight.
The legislature represents the people and their sovereignty and there is no question that it should participate in negotiations and oversee agreements. The ECFA talks and the signing of the agreement involve a high level of external risk and internal suspicion. Signing an economic pact with China will have a great impact on the public’s interests and so it is not to the benefit of Taiwan if the legislature cannot monitor this process. Legislators should take a more active role because we need forceful legislative oversight. They must not give up their powers and let the Cabinet do whatever it wants.
Hawang Shiow-duan is a professor of political science at Soochow University.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
In the past 72 hours, US Senators Roger Wicker, Dan Sullivan and Ruben Gallego took to social media to publicly rebuke the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over the defense budget. I understand that Taiwan’s head is on the chopping block, and the urgency of its security situation cannot be overstated. However, the comments from Wicker, Sullivan and Gallego suggest they have fallen victim to a sophisticated disinformation campaign orchestrated by an administration in Taipei that treats national security as a partisan weapon. The narrative fed to our allies claims the opposition is slashing the defense budget to kowtow to the Chinese
In a Taipei Times editorial published almost three years ago (“Macron goes off-piste,” April 13, 2023, page 8), French President Emmanuel Macron was criticized for comments he made immediately after meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing. Macron had spoken of the need for his country to find a path on Chinese foreign policy no longer aligned with that of the US, saying that continuing to follow the US agenda would sacrifice the EU’s strategic autonomy. At the time, Macron was criticized for gifting Xi a PR coup, and the editorial said that he had been “persuaded to run
The wrap-up press event on Feb. 1 for the new local period suspense film Murder of the Century (世紀血案), adapted from the true story of the Lin family murders (林家血案) in 1980, has sparked waves of condemnation in the past week, as well as a boycott. The film is based on the shocking, unsolved murders that occurred at then-imprisoned provincial councilor and democracy advocate Lin I-hsiung’s (林義雄) residence on Feb. 28, 1980, while Lin was detained for his participation in the Formosa Incident, in which police and protesters clashed during a pro-democracy rally in Kaohsiung organized by Formosa Magazine on Dec.
RSS