Ever since last year’s Sunflower movement, civic groups have advocated for constitutional reform in response to the crisis in the government system. Both of the major parties’ leaders have subsequently proposed constitutional reform and the legislature has started a consultative process.
As a burgeoning political party, the Social Democratic Party (SDP) hopes to add to the competition in a positive way, so that it may play a role in driving forward progress within the political sphere.
The SDP believes that constitutional reform, aside from balancing authority with responsibility, should also take into consideration the type of lifestyle that Taiwanese aspire toward.
The SDP advocates that everyone is entitled to live their lives with dignity and to enjoy genuine freedom, irrespective of economic, societal or cultural disadvantage.
For this reason, the party believes that in an egalitarian society, all citizens’ basic needs should be nationalized. For instance, higher education, nurseries and long-term care. Even more crucial is the establishment of a fair system of taxation, improving labor rights and resisting capitalism’s exploitation of the environment.
By examining the experience of different countries, it is clear that the ideas and values of social democracy can only take hold in a legislature that accommodates a broad range of ideas; only then can a corresponding Cabinet-style system of government work. The SDP believes that only a parliamentary, Cabinet-style system of government can deliver a free, egalitarian and united Taiwan.
Unfortunately, although the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has announced it supports a Cabinet-style government, in reality the party is unwilling to carry out a root-and-branch reform of the legislature in addition to establishing a political party law. Therefore, the Cabinet-style system of government announced by the KMT is nothing more than a way of maintaining power through a Cabinet-style system without responsibility.
The SDP believes that a move to a Cabinet-style system of government must be predicated on reform of the legislature, combined with the formulation of a social rights charter within the Constitution to establish a Cabinet system focused on social democracy.
A Cabinet-style system of government is fully compatible with a directly elected president. This type of a domestic model has been dubbed by commentators as a quasi-Cabinet system.
Academics have also broadly defined it as a semi-presidential system. In Europe, 10 countries, including Finland and Austria, have a Cabinet system and a directly elected president. These countries all score highly on international indices that measure democracy, good governance and citizens’ well-being.
In these Cabinet-style systems with a directly elected president, the president, as guardian of the constitution, still possesses a relatively large amount of power and is certainly not a nominal figurehead. For example, they can block radical political parties from joining the Cabinet if they pose a threat to the safety or unity of the nation, and they also have the power to reject highly controversial bills and either request that it is redebated by parliament or put to a referendum.
Additionally, they have the authority to nominate people for positions in independent institutions, such as judges to the country’s supreme court, judges to the constitutional court, the attorney general, the governor of the central bank and human rights commissioners.
The president is the outward-facing symbol of national sovereignty, especially in the fields of national security, foreign relations and defense, while domestically, he or she plays the role of a guardian in moderating the views and interests of both the legislature and political parties.
Prior to establishing a Cabinet-style system in Taiwan, it is necessary to first create a fair electoral system and a fair system of seat distribution within the legislature in to accurately reflect the full spectrum of public political opinion. If this is not done, there will be a democratic deficit within the Cabinet and it will fail as an operating unit.
It is for these reasons that the SDP advocates a two-stage process to constitutional reform. This year the focus should be concentrated on those sections of the Constitution for which there is already a consensus of opinion, especially reform of the electoral system, strengthening of human rights and lowering of the voting age to 18.
The SDP also asks that the two main parties adopt a broadminded attitude and responsibly advocate a full reform of the system of government and open up the process of constitutional reform to allow for the free flow of ideas from the bottom to the top so that a consensus may be reached. All candidates for the presidency should make a pledge to carry on with the second stage of the reform after next year’s legislative elections.
The founding goal of the SDP is to change the political landscape of Taiwan and to create a better life for everyone. Constitutional reform is a prerequisite for political change. The SDP’s advocacy of constitutional reform is in essence about creating a social democratic system of government that balances power with responsibility, looks after the disadvantaged and creates equality and solidarity.
Fan Yun is a professor of sociology at National Taiwan University and founder of the Social Democratic Party.
Translated by Edward Jones
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with