The furor over the National Assembly term extension is not dying down; if anything, it has only increased.
The most striking element of the whole affair is the process by which the latest deal was produced. One is reminded of the old saying about legislation and sausages: two things that one should never witness the making of.
Not only was public opinion clearly against all the forms of the extension, but even more startling was the fact that repeated, loud objections from the headquarters of all three parties were apparently disregarded by the National Assembly deputies. Even though the Assembly earned its nickname as the "constitutional monster" because of its unchecked powers, it was always assumed that the purpose of any abuses would be to benefit one or more particular parties. It strains credulity to think that the deputies would have had the temerity to act in defiance of party orders, especially without any support from the public.
This basic suspicion has set off a storm among the always-eager rumormongers and conspiracy theorists among us. Speculation about the wider motives, and about the people behind them, is filling the press.
Most of these rumors are specious. Nonetheless, they do highlight some of the basic problems facing us.
First, the utter failure of public opinion to have any impact on the Assemblymen's actions (aside from contributing to the decision to take a secret ballot) raises the red flag of National Assembly action outside the scrutiny of the electorate. This danger will likely rise, not fall, in the near future, since the only element of pressure from the public -- the need to prepare for the next election -- has now been lifted from the members's shoulders. If they had simply adopted the new proportional representation system and then finished the term, this would not be a concern. But instead we now face the prospect of almost three years of a body which not only cannot be checked by any other institution (pace calls for the Council of Grand Justices to intervene), but also will not be subject to any election at the end of the day.
In more institutionalized systems, this situation might not be a bad thing. Some in the United States, for example, have observed the higher quality of policymaking of second-term (ie not up for reelection) presidents. A number of countries, such as Mexico, forbid their presidents from running again, for much the same logic. However, in Taiwan, given our not yet solidified constitutional system, we must retain a high degree of vigilance throughout this period. Our hope is that this lame duck Assembly will take as little action as possible.
Second, the high degree of behind-the-scenes maneuvering, not to say duplicity, on display by our political parties, particularly the KMT and the DPP, is alarming. Obviously a deal has been reached by certain key elements, while both parties continue officially to protest their innocence to blunt any voter backlash. In the future, when the Assembly delegates are responsible only to party headquarters, will this be the standard mode of constitutional reform?
The proportional representation system that is to be implemented has its merits. Chief among these are the strengthening of party politics at the expense of personality and local factionalism. But if individuals and factions within the parties can circumvent the process, these gains will be illusory. Abolishing the National Assembly altogether remains the best solution.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS