By blocking the voting procedure in the legislature’s extraordinary session, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators blocked the nomination of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) Control Yuan nominees. However, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) did not give up, calling a second extraordinary session to guarantee that the Control Yuan nominee list and the act regulating the oversight of cross-strait agreements are passed.
It might not be such a bad thing if the nominations were blocked and the Control Yuan had to close down. During the DPP administration, the KMT blocked then-president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) list of nominees, shutting down the institution for three years without any problems. Why not close it again?
The Control Yuan is inherently flawed. When the Constitution was written, the old censor system was touched up and the ill-defined Control Yuan created, splitting the legislative oversight function in two. This split caused an imbalance in power between the Cabinet and the legislature, for a long time leaving the Cabinet the more powerful of the two.
Control Yuan members are nominated by the president and approved by the legislature. Why would anyone appointed by the president act against his will? The Control Yuan’s power has always been empty, particularly now under Ma. Small wonder, then, that calls for abolishing the institution are growing louder.
The Control Yuan system used to include members with strength of character. The nomination process then deteriorated and was basically used as a means of political patronage, filling the Control Yuan with political hatchet men and obedient yes men. According to public opinion, the current nomination list is the worst in the institution’s history, and even KMT legislators are loath to vote for the nominees. It is not surprising that they let the first extraordinary session come to an end.
The low quality of the nomination lists for the Examination Yuan and the Control Yuan is related to the prestige of Ma and his leadership. Whatever he and National Security Council Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) say must be carried out, and now they are using Constitutional Interpretation No. 632 to argue that it was unconstitutional for the DPP to block the vote. The interpretation states: “The Constitution does not allow for the event in which either the president or the Legislative Yuan fails to nominate or consent to the nomination of candidates so that the Control Yuan cannot exercise its power or function, thereby jeopardizing the integrity of the constitutional system.”
However, Ma has been nominating candidates, and the legislature has been reviewing the nominations, both during the ordinary and an extraordinary legislative session, so it would seem that this fulfills the constitutional requirements.
In the past, the KMT blocked Chen’s Control Yuan nominations, saying his approval ratings were too low, so he was not qualified to make the nominations, and that many of the nominations were political patronage appointments. Now Ma’s nomination list is said to be too weak and full of nominations made as political rewards. Even worse, Chen’s approval rating stood at 18 percent, and, while low, it was twice Ma’s 9 percent. If Chen was not qualified to make nominations, neither is Ma.
Looking at these facts, one can only wonder how the KMT will justify its actions.
The best policy would be for Ma to withdraw his nominations and replace them with a list of nominees that satisfies the public and the opposition. The second-best policy would be to let the Control Yuan come to a standstill. That would both spare the nation a lot of problems and save a lot of money. The next-best policy would be to let KMT legislators vote their conscience so that the worst nominations could be eliminated.
The worst policy would be to resort to party discipline and demand that every nominee be approved, setting off all-out war in the legislature and drawing severe criticism from the public.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers