Rethinking the constitution
In her inaugural address on May 20, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said she would launch a judicial reform in October. Has she kept her promise? Let’s review it from the Constitution.
The Republic of China Constitution was drafted by a single party, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), adopted by the National Constituent Assembly on Dec. 25, 1946, and went into effect one year later on Dec. 25, 1947.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) did not engage in the drafting process, nor did it accept or recognize the Constitution as the fundamental law of China. On the contrary, it drafted another constitution of Chinese people and kicked the KMT out of China in 1949.
The KMT escaped to Taiwan and resumed office as the exiled government of China by upholding the Constitution that was rejected by all Chinese in China, but it used that constitution to brainwash Taiwanese to convince them they were the real bosses of China.
Seventy years have gone by and now Taiwanese have finally woken up to realize that the ROC Constitution is a forged document voided by 1.3 billion Chinese in China, but forced 23 million Taiwanese into territorial ownership of China and Mongolia. Ironically, Taiwanese were not invited to draft that constitution, but they have to live with it.
At the beginning of this year, Taiwanese finally overthrew the KMT government and the voice of transitional justice roared to the sky.
As a Taiwanese, how should we read the ROC Constitution? Is it Taiwan’s constitution? Who can properly interpret it?
Council of Grand Justices nominee Hsu Chih-hsiung (許志雄) said that Taiwan is a nation, but abnormal.
The ROC was a name abandoned by China and officially replaced by the People’s Republic of China and it is not appropriate using it to identify Taiwan and is confusing to the world that it stands for China, he said. There is no clear boundary of the historical national territory of China, he added.
The Constitution was drawn up in and for China and not tailor-made in or for Taiwan and we need a constitution that appropriately represents Taiwan, he said.
Former grand justice Hsu Tzong-li (許宗力) said that we must first clarify the reasons Taiwan lacks judicial credibility, reduce the workload of judges to take into account efficiency and quality and review the judge evaluation system. In addition, we have to deal with the oft-criticized issues of lawyer qualifications, legal education and dialogue between courts and society and invite the public to get involved in the grand jury system.
We must improve the constitutional review system so people can appeal to the grand justices to interpret the unconditional judgement; establish a tribunal in the court of final appeal to reconstruct a mechanism for unifying legal views, he said.
As for the issue of Hsu’s reappointment, it has been confused with the re-election. It has been more than five years since his retirement as a grand justice in September 2011. There should not be any concerns to his acceptance of the nomination as Judicial Yuan president.
Grand justice nominee Hwang Jau-yuan (黃昭元) in July urged the government to replace the title ROC with “Taiwan.” He said that Taiwanese have major differences in their national identity; some call it the ROC and the others call it Taiwan. He also said the grand justices should maintain political neutrality in political disputes.
Hwang believes that Taiwan has practiced democracy for so many years that it should have left the authoritarian era behind. One should not be forced to express patriotism like in the Cultural Revolution or under Nazi rule, he said, adding that in a democracy, no one should be forced to express one’s position, including one’s identification with national symbols.
All three nominees have honestly pointed out the bottleneck issues in Taiwan that have been neglected for years. Hopefully all of them can be approved and they can plunge into their respective positions right away to work for Taiwan.
Yes, it will be a good start for Tsai keeping her promises made at her inauguration ceremony to launch judicial reform this month. However, that is not enough.
There is still tons of work to be done. Why was former executive secretary of the Executive Yuan Lin Yi-shih (林益世) found guilty, but still at large? Why was former prosecutor-general Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) found guilty, but allowed to retire with a considerable pension?
Why is former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) still not free? Why has former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) been accused in so many cases, but is still at large and can freely travel around the world? Transitional justice is simply not working.
Taiwan must move toward a normal nation having an appropriate name to identify itself and an appropriate constitution to uphold the nation.
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
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
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
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
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.