The constitutional issues created by the force of the Sunflower movement are percolating.
Last month, former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) set up the People Rule Foundation to promote constitutional reform, and in May, prior to handing over the reigns to DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), former DPP chairman Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) promoted the idea of a Cabinet system of government.
After Tsai took over from Su, she criticized the electoral system, calling it unfair in a May 25 opinion piece in the Apple Daily entitled “My Views on Constitutional Reform.”
In it, she promoted the adoption of a system of mixed-member proportional representation in which the proportion of votes received in an election would match the proportion of legislative seats awarded to a party. That was followed by a commentary by attorney C.V. Chen (陳長文) in which he expressed agreement with this view and said he had made the same suggestion two years earlier.
New Party cofounder Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) has also said that he favors a Cabinet system and that he feels President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should spearhead a constitutional amendment.
Most constitutional amendments have been technical adjustments to adapt the Nanjing Constitution, which did not have to address the current cross-strait issue, to the situation in Taiwan. The rest, such as the electoral system, were a matter of party interests. When it comes to the systemic design flaws proven by Taiwan’s current constitutional situation, no one, including Ma, either dares or wants to change them.
The fact is that this does not really matter, because reform is a huge project that requires the right environment and the right moment rather than depending on any individual.
In her opinion piece, Tsai mentioned the theory of transformative “constitutional moments,” which is based on the US constitutional experience, and said this was something that Taiwan could learn from.
According to this theory, the Constitution is a systemic blueprint that accumulates momentum for change after having “clashed” with reality.
Next year is set to be a year-long election campaign for the 2016 presidential and legislative elections.
First, that will give civil society a full year to pressure candidates into focusing on constitutional reform and forcing them to express their support for amending the Constitution.
Second, current regulations stipulate that half a year after a constitutional amendment has been passed, a referendum must be held. This leaves sufficient time for voters to put pressure on candidates and their parties to have a constitutional amendment passed by the legislature during the first half of next year and pledge to hold the referendum on the same day as the 2016 presidential election, or else it will never happen.
This first wave of constitutional amendments is to be initiated by the public at the ballot box, without support from the government. It should be directed at fundamental constitutional functions, and to avoid complications, the procedure should be kept simple and only include three items: Replacing the mixed-member majority system with the mixed-member proportional representation system promoted by Tsai and Chen; lowering the voting age to 18 years; and lowering the threshold for constitutional amendments. If only one amendment is possible, it should be the change of the electoral system.
Finally, presidential candidates should agree to step down after one term and pledge to move the country toward a Cabinet system after being elected. As this involves changes to the constitutional framework, it will not be possible if it is not led by the president.
The reason change is necessary is that history has showed that the current semi-presidential system in combination with the nation’s authoritarian past creates an incompetent “emperor,” and that the public’s hands are tied due to the guaranteed term in office. Without the cultural environment of the US, we shouldn’t expect US-style democracy.
For the president to step down after just one term will not be a loss: Once the president completes the Cabinet system using the presidency and national resources, the president of 2016 is very likely to be the prime minister of 2020.
Christian Fan Jiang is deputy convener of Northern Taiwan Society’s Legal and Political Group.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
RSS