Later this month the legislature plans to discuss whether to establish a committee to push for constitutional amendments. This is a welcome development.
After 16 years and two two-term presidents, the patchwork constitutional amendments currently in use have proven to be failures. At the moment, there are great discrepancies between power and accountability in Taiwan’s constitutional system, which is disconnected from the need for social progress. It renders the government unable to function effectively, and it makes it more difficult for it to respond to public opinion promptly and forcefully. The nation has now reached a point where it is left with no choice other than to amend the Constitution.
However, it is very difficult to pass a constitutional amendment due to the high threshold requirement. Many have been calling for amendments over the past several years, but it has always seemed hopeless. However, in recent years civic movements have generated a new wave of momentum for constitutional reform. This pressure has now even forced the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), for the first time, to show willingness to push for constitutional reform. The nation is now facing a historic opportunity for reform and this is a chance that it should seize.
Taiwan must not sit back and watch or try to delay reform based on political calculations. No matter what reform plans are proposed, they should be handled without delay.
According to the Constitution, it is the legislature that holds the power to propose and vote on constitutional amendments. Voters then need to go to the ballot box in a referendum on the amendment after a six-month period announcing the proposal to the public following its passage. Due to the requirement that at least 50 percent of all eligible voters vote in a referendum, it is extremely difficult to pass an amendment unless the referendum is held in tandem with a national election.
Although the ruling and opposition parties might still have differing opinions on the content of a constitutional amendment, the nation must avail itself of this opportunity and work to quickly build a consensus during the first half of next year so the legislature can propose and pass any amendments in a timely manner. This would be the only way possible for the government to hold a referendum on the amendments together with the 2016 presidential and legislative elections, while allowing for the required six-month period to announce the proposed amendment to the public. The opportunity could be missed if it is discussed for too long without coming to a decision. Once the driving force for constitutional reform begins to weaken, no one knows how long it will take before another historical opportunity like this comes around again.
It should be noted that although a constitutional amendment brooks no delay, its enactment can be postponed. It could be clearly stipulated that the enactment of the amendments should be delayed to 2020 or perhaps even later, so that they would not affect the presidential and legislative elections in 2016. This could be a way of avoiding meaningless speculation on politicians’ motivation to push for constitutional reform, which could interfere with rational discussions on the issue.
There should be no more avoidance, no more delay, no more calculations and no more patchwork constitutional amendments. Despite differing political stances, everyone should cooperate. The pan-blue and the pan-green camps should cooperate. So too, should the public. Starting out from the point of view of the public and with the nation’s long-term stability as first priority, the nation should push for constitutional reform beginning today.
Su Tseng-chang is a former premier and chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party.
Translated by Eddy Chang
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS