One day after President William Lai (賴清德) was sworn in, tens of thousands of citizens gathered outside the Legislative Yuan, as legislators held a highly contentious session inside the building. Protesters decried the two major opposition parties — the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), whose combined seats in the legislature outnumber that of Lai’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) — for sponsoring several bills that are widely viewed as unconstitutional, financially and environmentally unsustainable or a threat to privacy rights.
Equally objectionable in the eyes of many civic groups was the disregard for due process, as the bills were rushed through the legislature without sufficient discussion or bipartisan negotiations, and legislators were allowed to vote anonymously so that they could avoid accountability during the next election.
Many described the civil unrest as the new Sunflower movement, referencing the student movement that took place 10 years ago at the same site for similar reasons.
However, academics and veteran activists have warned that the current KMT-TPP sponsored bills would have a greater and more destructive impact on Taiwan’s democracy than the proposed trade deal with China being opposed in 2014.
One proposal would allow the legislature to punish government officials, legal persons and private citizens that fail to hand over documents by finding them in “contempt of the legislature” and/or imposing exorbitant fines. Grave concerns about the overreach of the legislative branch has worried and angered many.
Ironically, the placards of many protesters read: “I hold the legislature in contempt” as KMT and TPP legislators were poised to pass their “contempt of the legislature” bills.
Taiwanese must indeed express their anger at the Legislative Yuan, as KMT and TPP legislators have abandoned their civic duties.
Yale University sociologist Jeffrey Alexander says that, while campaign speeches and performances are often intensely partisan and even ugly, successful democracies must maintain cultural rituals and institutional procedures to ensure that partisan struggles, no matter how intense, work to strengthen, not derail, democracy.
Thus, the winners give acceptance speeches to honor their competitors and reaffirm nonpartisan commitment to the people, while the losers concede elections and vow to support the people’s chosen candidates.
Political parties commit to following and protecting common democratic procedures even as they pursue ideologically divergent goals, and government officials are obligated to follow the law and serve the people, above and beyond party interests.
If this sounds mundane, it is worth remembering that these civic virtues were put to an extreme test in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election in the US. Donald Trump became the first US president not to attend his successor’s inauguration since 1869, which exacerbated rather than healed the social rifts caused by the election.
In their latest dangerous and detestable violations of their civic duties, KMT and TPP legislators are endangering Taiwan’s democracy for the sake of partisan goals. Many of them opted to boycott Lai’s inauguration on Monday. They then contravened democratic processes to pursue legislation. Their sponsored bills have raised many eyebrows regarding whether they are meant to serve political parties or the populace.
Throughout, these legislators have been repeating the mantra “democracy means the minority obeys the majority.” Therein lies the reason for the people to hold the legislature in contempt, for democracy must not be reduced to merely counting votes.
Stripped of the separation of powers, substantive policy evaluation and the protection of civil liberties, liberal democracies face the danger of degenerating into illiberal democracies. This is the path onto which KMT and TPP legislators are pushing Taiwan.
That is why the people of Taiwan must hold the legislature in contempt until further notice.
Lo Ming-cheng is a professor of Sociology at the University of California-Davis, whose research addresses civil society, political cultures and medical sociology.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS