At a recent press conference, a journalist asked me: “How would you convince an ordinary person busy making a living that constitutional reform is relevant to them?”
This is indeed an important question. This time, constitutional reform requires more public attention and participation, but constitutional construction itself is not an easily accessible art. It is very difficult to make people leave their daily lives behind and pursue the most fundamental part of constitutional self-rule — writing, or amending, a constitution.
The last stage of constitutional reform is a referendum, but this does not mean that public participation is restricted to approving of a constitutional amendment that has been discussed, planned and arranged by leaders and elites. Indeed, allowing a degree of public participation in the formation of a constitutional amendment increases the likelihood that the amendment of a referendum is approved, but that is not the only reason for encouraging public participation in constitutional reform.
Constitutional reform requires very strong political momentum. A look at the current constitutional and political situation in Taiwan tells us without a doubt that mainstream opinion is the main source driving constitutional reform.
The strength of public support for such reform affects the scope of the issue and how far-reaching the changes are to be and, on the other hand, the speed of the process. There is no need for us to be so suspicious of politicians trickery or calculations. If civil society has a strong political will to initiate and participate in constitutional reform, such reform does not become a bogus issue or become decided by an elite.
The question is how we should go about mobilizing the public, who normally only show up on voting day, and give them the required motivation to pay attention to and actively participate in constitutional amendment debates and campaigns.
Telling people concretely where the “beef” is in constitutional reform is probably not an effective strategy. As they measure their benefits and disadvantages, most people are likely to simply jump on the bandwagon.
Under these circumstances, all we can do is to call on them to express their “civic virtue,” the noblest virtue in a republic. If every person is willing to make goodness and justice in this constitution his or her own responsibility, then any change to the nation’s constitutional system is his or her business.
When the public is willing to take the time required to follow and understand the issues involved in constitutional reform, and to actively participate in public deliberation of such reform, they transform from being just “ordinary citizens” participating in regular politics to “constitutional citizens” participating in constitutional politics. It is only when a substantial proportion of the public starts to experience this kind of transformation that the “constitutional moment” that many commentators have been hoping for would possess the historical weight required to surpass and reconstruct normal politics, instead of simply being a byword for the constitutional reform process.
There are many different reasons for adopting a “none-of-my-business” attitude, but if you are willing to take responsibility as a “constitutional citizen,” constitutional reform becomes your business.
With your participation, the reform process is further blessed by your noble virtue. It seems that many citizens have already decided to support and pay attention to the reform. How about you?
Su Yen-tu is an assistant research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institutum Iurisprudentiae.
Translated by Eddy Chang
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his