In a referendum on Sunday last week, Chileans voted with an overwhelming majority of 78.3 percent in favor of writing a new constitution to replace one that has been in place since the military dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet.
In Taiwan, the Constitution written and implemented by the old authoritarian regime remains firmly in place.
Not only is there a high threshold for constitutional amendments, there is also a ban on holding a referendum on whether to write a new constitution.
The Chilean constitution does not restrict the scope of a referendum, and Chileans can use referendums to decide on issues of sovereignty, and civil and other rights.
Chileans aged 18 or older and foreigners with permanent residency in Chile can vote in a referendum.
In Taiwan, Article 136 of the Constitution restricts the scope of referendums, saying: “The exercise of the rights of initiative and referendum shall be prescribed by law.”
In other words, referendums can only bring about new laws that do not contradict the Constitution.
The Referendum Act (公民投票法) also stipulates that the public can only initiate the process of writing new laws or major policies, but they cannot initiate the writing of a new constitution.
Although opinion polls show that 80 percent of Taiwanese are in favor of a new constitution, it remains impossible for the public to set in motion a process leading to a new one.
The only route forward is a referendum on a policy recommendation.
For example, the Taiwan Constitution Foundation’s referendum proposal for a new constitution utilizes an indirect question: “Do you agree that a request should be made that the president should promote the formulation of a new constitution in line with Taiwan’s status quo?”
Even after the abolition of the National Assembly, Taiwanese have lacked the right to directly participate in constitutional amendments.
If the public would like to initiate a constitutional referendum, they must first face examination by the Central Election Committee.
If there is any conflict of interest between the public and the government, the committee can easily come up with reasons, and excuses, to reject a referendum request.
The act gives much leeway to the government and does not represent the spirit of public political participation.
A referendum should be a symbol of self-governance and the freedom of expression of public opinion.
The narrow scope of a referendum in Taiwan is preposterous and not in line with the principle of popular sovereignty.
Taiwan is proud of its democracy and rule of law, but the referendum system lags behind Chile’s.
Taiwan’s government will hopefully pay more attention to mainstream public opinion.
Yang Chun-chieh is a graduate student at National Tsing-Hua University’s Institute of Sociology.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS