State of nation tactics
None of the three parties in the new legislature have more than half of the total seats. With the new legislative session about to begin, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) of the pan-blue camp and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) of the white camp have been sharpening their knives.
For the KMT, caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) said he would push for the normalization of a presidential state of the nation address to the legislature and seek amendments to compel the president to answer questions from lawmakers.
TPP secretary-general Wu Chun-cheng (吳春城) agreed, saying that it would be “the sooner the better” for a rule change and that the state of the nation address should be a “question and answer” session to prevent the president from evading accountability.
KMT Legislator Lai Shyh-bao (賴士葆) demanded that president-elect William Lai (賴清德) “answer all the questions, and answer them truthfully” after he takes office as president on May 20 following his election victory with the Democratic Progressive Party last month.
The Legislative Yuan — which is the highest organ of public opinion in Taiwan — is responsible for monitoring the government.
This is indeed in line with the operation of a democratic constitutional system.
However, under the “five power” Constitution, the highest organ of the administrative branch is the Executive Yuan, with the Legislative Yuan and Executive Yuan on the same level.
Although the Constitution clearly and definitively states that the premier and his Cabinet members should face questions from the legislature, there is no legal basis for the opposition camp to demand that the president be subjected to such a process as well.
Before an amendment is passed, it should remain a constitutional norm for the legislature to be limited to questioning the premier and Cabinet members.
The opposition camp’s demand for an “impromptu” session of “answering all the questions and answering them truthfully” is at best a disguised threat or an insult to the president.
Moreover, given the uneven quality, knowledge and cultivation of legislators, they would be unable to put aside their resentments —be they personal or because of their party — during a question-and-answer session.
If the lawmakers are unable to ask meaningful questions, how can they expect the president to answer them truthfully?
If the pan-blue and white camps continue to play tricks, it might even trigger public protests.
Tien Fong-wen
Taipei
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS