The first televised debate in preparation for the March 22 presidential election, in which the public will have an opportunity to ask questions to the candidates, will take place on Sunday.
A few days ago, the main organizers -- several newspapers and TV stations -- unveiled the list of the 20 participants who have been selected to ask questions of the candidates. The categories are wide ranging, from the cross-strait issue and foreign affairs to birth rates and the gambling industry. It is clear that the public has high expectations for the policy implementation of the next president.
The main organizers of the debate said that not many questions will deal with national defense, foreign affairs or cross-strait issues, as most people seem to be concerned with living standards and the economy. We can therefore hope that the two candidates will use this platform to propose concrete and comprehensive policies on matters that clearly are of concern to Taiwanese.
In the mind of the public, the president should possess wide ranging capabilities and have an opinion on and a policy for every issue.
There is a concern, however: Regardless of how many concrete promises the two candidates make in the televised debate, the question is, what are the chances that these policy promises really will be implemented? An even more serious issue is the question of whether the candidates should be making promises in the first place.
Under the constitutional system, the Cabinet is the nation's highest executive institution. This raises the question of whether it is in line with the spirit of the Constitution for presidential candidates to make all kinds of policy promises and whether the future premier is bound to implement the promises made by the president during an election campaign.
Looking at political realities, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) holds less than one-quarter of all seats in the legislature and the party's presidential candidate, Frank Hsieh (
If Hsieh were to win the presidential election, then how could he -- if he really is to be a passive president who delegates executive power -- implement all the promises he made during the election campaign? Or will he simply blame the legislature for being a "source of chaos," or claim that promises made during the election campaign do not necessarily have to be implemented?
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
The most preposterous aspect of the constitutional system is, in fact, the huge discrepancy between the public's expectations and understanding of the role of the president and the actual limitations that are imposed on the president by the Constitution.
The election campaign should be an opportunity to educate the public on these issues. But the media, the political elite and even the presidential candidates have acted in a way that increases the discrepancies between fact and perception.
In this context, some people have begun to wonder if now might not be the appropriate time to move from a semi-presidential to a clear-cut Cabinet system.
In the 2004 presidential election campaign, I was lucky enough to be one of the people who was allowed to question the candidates in what was the nation's first-ever televised debate between presidential candidates.
My question was this: "During every presidential campaign, the various candidates bring forward a multitude of policy proposals. However, according to the current Constitution, the Cabinet is the nation's highest executive office. Although the Cabinet is answerable to the legislature, it is the president who has the right to appoint the premier. Until the Constitution is amended or until there is a new constitution in place, what role do you think a presidential candidate who promises to abide by the Constitution should play when it comes to formulating public policy if we assume that he or she wants to follow the spirit of constitutionalism and responsible politics? And if the Constitution is amended, or if a new constitution is adopted, in what way do you think the roles of the president and the premier should be adjusted?"
I am still waiting for an answer.
Wang Yeh-lih is a professor of political science at Tunghai University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
RSS