The Penghu gambling referendum on Sept. 26, 2009, is the only referendum that has been passed since the legislature enacted the Referendum Act (公民投票法) in 2003, even though for all practical purposes this particular referendum is not actually applicable to the act. This is an ironic outcome, especially in light of the fact that, at the same time, a social movement launched a referendum demanding that the government renegotiate a beef trade deal with the US. The referendum proposal was eventually killed by the excessively high threshold in the second stage of petitioning, while the Taiwan Solidarity Union’s referendum on the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) was annihilated in the review process by the Cabinet’s Referendum Commission. Time and again, it has been proven that the Referendum Act is a dead end.
How do we solve this seemingly unsolvable issue? Amending the Referendum Act is one possible route. The double threshold for petitioning must be lowered, doing away with limitations on the number of votes needed to pass, and making sure the Referendum Commission returns to procedural inspections only. Moreover, the government should help in the process of reviewing and accepting referendums. These proposals do not usually cause dispute, yet they are unable to gain traction in the legislature. The biggest problem is not in the legislation itself, but rather in how Taiwanese independence----unification politics are declared and represented.
Besides referendums being bound directly to general elections and disputes over the president initiating politically manipulated defensive referendums, referendums and the issue of self-determination have overlapped since the Referendum Act was passed. Hence, the debate over referendums is typically not conducted in the context of strengthening the democratic system. Instead of asking how referendums can mend the inefficiencies of representative democracy, the question is how referendums can speed up the development of Taiwanese independence. Isn’t the performance of the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) a conspicuous warning?
Unrestrained dualistic -unification-independence hostilities are nothing new in the history of Taiwan’s democracy. Unification-independence politics have been acted out upon the political stage to stifle democracy, such as a debate over the direct election of the president, or a plan to disenfranchise districts in national elections. The outcome is that Ma, who is shifting the focus from independence to unification, can win a landslide victory in direct presidential elections and the reactionaries who advocated indirect elections have become the beneficiaries of direct elections.
Therefore, in amending the Referendum Act, we must return to popular self-government as a core value, allowing the Referendum Act to provide referendums that are for the public and focus on public policy, so that Taiwan’s referendum democracy can develop and offer relief to a representative democracy that is becoming inept. This sort of bottom-up philosophy will inevitably abolish the rights of the president and the legislature to initiate referendums, reducing and limiting politicians’ ability to manipulate politics, and it will serve to expand the freedom and will of the public to initiate referendums. All of these things must occur to finally avoid the use of unification-independence discourse to smother Taiwan’s democracy.
Hsu Yung-ming is an assistant professor of political science at Soochow University.
Translated by Kyle Jeffcoat
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS