When New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced his bid for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairmanship, he also called for a referendum on a constitutional amendment to replace the semi-presidential system of government with a parliamentary one, as well as a review of the single-member district, two-vote system for legislators.
Prior to that, 37 legislators from across party lines had signed a motion calling for a constitutional amendment committee and a switch to a parliamentary system, to better reflect public opinion and resolve constitutional difficulties posed by the current system — in which a powerful president cannot be held accountable. Another window of opportunity for constitutional change seems to have opened.
The current electoral systems were a product of cooperation between the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) when the fourth constitutional amendment passed in 1997 and the seventh amendment in 2005. Now, both parties are calling for an amendment that would change the system of government to a parliamentary one, which seems to imply a fairly advanced common understanding.
However, the ruling and opposition parties must first offer the public a clear and unequivocal explanation of some issues.
First, the core principle of a parliamentary system is that power resides in parliament and the head of state is a figurehead. This is true of most countries that have adopted such a system. However, that means Taiwan would have to abolish direct presidential elections, because voters would find it difficult to accept that a directly elected president would be only a figurehead. Politicians who support the parliamentary system have a responsibility to tell the public that direct presidential elections must be abolished, and must win the public’s support for such a stand.
Second, a parliamentary system focuses on power integration rather than a separation of powers. Most Cabinet members in countries with such a system are also members of parliament of the majority party or the majority coalition of parties. Given the current size of Taiwan’s Cabinet — based on the number of members in former premier Jiang Yi-huah’s (江宜樺) Cabinet — and the number of legislators, this would be difficult to implement. If Taiwan were to switch to a Cabinet system, it would have to consider a restructuring of the Cabinet and an increase in legislators. It would also affect the structure of single-member districts and the ratio of legislators-at-large.
Chu also suggested that the single-member district, two-vote system be reviewed and that the threshold for allotted legislative seats be lowered. In addition, DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) a few days ago called for adopting the mixed-member proportional representation system in place in Germany.
Since the end of World War II, no party in the German parliament has ever held an absolute majority, making coalition governments the norm. If Taiwan’s legislative electoral system is changed to the German system, the nation must also be prepared for a multiparty system and coalition governments, as well as constructive votes of no confidence and other issues.
Will future constitutional reform in Taiwan be restricted to a different variant of the semi-presidential system? This could mean that the president appoints the premier, who must be approved by the legislature, that the Cabinet is formed by the legislative majority party or a coalition of parties, and that Cabinet members are also members of the legislature. This is an alternative that the political elites of the governing and opposition parties should not reject out of hand.
Wang Yeh-lih is a political science professor at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry