The constitutional issues created by the force of the Sunflower movement are percolating.
Last month, former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) set up the People Rule Foundation to promote constitutional reform, and in May, prior to handing over the reigns to DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), former DPP chairman Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) promoted the idea of a Cabinet system of government.
After Tsai took over from Su, she criticized the electoral system, calling it unfair in a May 25 opinion piece in the Apple Daily entitled “My Views on Constitutional Reform.”
In it, she promoted the adoption of a system of mixed-member proportional representation in which the proportion of votes received in an election would match the proportion of legislative seats awarded to a party. That was followed by a commentary by attorney C.V. Chen (陳長文) in which he expressed agreement with this view and said he had made the same suggestion two years earlier.
New Party cofounder Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) has also said that he favors a Cabinet system and that he feels President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should spearhead a constitutional amendment.
Most constitutional amendments have been technical adjustments to adapt the Nanjing Constitution, which did not have to address the current cross-strait issue, to the situation in Taiwan. The rest, such as the electoral system, were a matter of party interests. When it comes to the systemic design flaws proven by Taiwan’s current constitutional situation, no one, including Ma, either dares or wants to change them.
The fact is that this does not really matter, because reform is a huge project that requires the right environment and the right moment rather than depending on any individual.
In her opinion piece, Tsai mentioned the theory of transformative “constitutional moments,” which is based on the US constitutional experience, and said this was something that Taiwan could learn from.
According to this theory, the Constitution is a systemic blueprint that accumulates momentum for change after having “clashed” with reality.
Next year is set to be a year-long election campaign for the 2016 presidential and legislative elections.
First, that will give civil society a full year to pressure candidates into focusing on constitutional reform and forcing them to express their support for amending the Constitution.
Second, current regulations stipulate that half a year after a constitutional amendment has been passed, a referendum must be held. This leaves sufficient time for voters to put pressure on candidates and their parties to have a constitutional amendment passed by the legislature during the first half of next year and pledge to hold the referendum on the same day as the 2016 presidential election, or else it will never happen.
This first wave of constitutional amendments is to be initiated by the public at the ballot box, without support from the government. It should be directed at fundamental constitutional functions, and to avoid complications, the procedure should be kept simple and only include three items: Replacing the mixed-member majority system with the mixed-member proportional representation system promoted by Tsai and Chen; lowering the voting age to 18 years; and lowering the threshold for constitutional amendments. If only one amendment is possible, it should be the change of the electoral system.
Finally, presidential candidates should agree to step down after one term and pledge to move the country toward a Cabinet system after being elected. As this involves changes to the constitutional framework, it will not be possible if it is not led by the president.
The reason change is necessary is that history has showed that the current semi-presidential system in combination with the nation’s authoritarian past creates an incompetent “emperor,” and that the public’s hands are tied due to the guaranteed term in office. Without the cultural environment of the US, we shouldn’t expect US-style democracy.
For the president to step down after just one term will not be a loss: Once the president completes the Cabinet system using the presidency and national resources, the president of 2016 is very likely to be the prime minister of 2020.
Christian Fan Jiang is deputy convener of Northern Taiwan Society’s Legal and Political Group.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past