Sun, May 08, 2016 page8

• Deciphering constitutional reform

  • By Su Yen-tu 蘇彥圖
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Taiwan needs comprehensive constitutional reform and yet the nation seems incapable of even achieving something as simple as lowering the minimum voting age. Those in favor of reform might want to think about this: Given the myriad restrictions in our current politics, how are we to get past the political sound bites and academic prevarications and begin these reforms as soon as is possible? This is the million-dollar question in what might be termed the “politics of constitutional reform.”

  The Civil Movement for Constitutional Reform, after much discussion and debate, has proposed one solution, in the form of draft legislation on the procedure for civic participation in constitutional reform.

  This draft seeks to extend civic participation in the process of constitutional reform — especially in the initial stages — and to strengthen democratic deliberation, or the idea of reflection and choice that US founding father Alexander Hamilton spoke of in his 1787 essay Federalist No. 1.

  In practical terms, we are very confident that this proposed legislation would enable, over the next four years and via referendums held on the same days as the general elections in 2018 and 2020, the completion of at least parts of the major reforms needed, such as reform of the constitutional amendments process, the electoral system and the constitutional government system. It would also strengthen the nation’s experience, vision and competency in this grand project of constitutional government.

  Without first reforming and supplementing the current inadequate procedures and overturning the old politics, the nongovernmental organizations and political parties advocating constitutional reform would not be able to achieve reform, no matter how hard they try.

  Last year’s failure to bring about constitutional reform remains fresh in our minds. This attempt to rewrite the rules of the game is more than a shift in policy, it is a shift from broken politics to “good politics.”

  It might well be easier to get constitutional reform onto the legislative agenda, now that a new party enjoys a majority in the legislature. However, the endeavor still faces three challenges.

  First, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) still controls enough legislative seats to veto a motion for constitutional reform, and it might still oppose such a motion because of emotional reasons and/or out of its own interests.

  Second, even if both parties get behind constitutional reform, they might still differ greatly on the specifics of what that might actually look like.

  Third, geopolitical considerations, especially pressure from China and the US, will — at least in part — curtail the direction and choices Taiwan has concerning a constitutional reform.

  The proposed legislation — and its drafting and implementation — would undoubtedly go some way to overcoming these difficulties. In strengthening citizens’ participation in reasoned debate, pragmatic, self-interested political parties would be less likely to presume to object to reform for objection’s sake, as to do so would see them punished in the polls.

  Even if public debate is unable to dissipate major differences — such as on the Cabinet system versus the presidential system — it would at least allow us to establish common ground and put differences aside for the time being. A legislative schedule is more concrete than voiced intentions and the actual procedure can be more democratic and rigorous.

  Also, the process could mitigate our allies’ concerns about constitutional reform, which would also help us attain international recognition and support for the process. In addition, the establishment of a civil constitutional government conference would ensure that sufficient resources — especially the valuable commodity of time — are invested into constitutional reform.

  The design of a political system allows room for debate and revision, but the politicians engaged in striving for a new constitution cannot, and should not, falter on the way to the good politics of constitutional reform.

  It is of paramount importance that procedural legislation is passed first, and this would make constitutional reforms that Taiwan so sorely needs, a possibility.

  Su Yen-tu is an assistant research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institutum Iurisprudentiae.

  Translated by Paul Cooper
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Jeers as Real Madrid fall 2-1 to Man City

  • 2

    US bolstering first island chain deterrence: NSB report

  • 3

    Taiwanese tourists go viral in video during Japan quake

  • 4

    Taiwan, Poland to codevelop drones

  • 5

    Climber to attempt free solo of 101