Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) — who once endured the hardship of living under an authoritarian political system and arduously led a quiet revolution — once said: “Democratic issues must be solved with democratic means.” Today, as Taiwanese are faced with the malicious subversion of our country’s democratic constitutional order, we must not panic. Rather, we should start by taking democratic action to rescue the Constitutional Court.
As Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) leads the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) in strangling Taiwan’s judiciary and depriving individuals of the right to recall and development, Taiwanese are filled with anxiety. In response, various countermeasures have been proposed — the Executive Yuan could refuse to countersign, President William Lai (賴清德) could refuse to promulgate the law, a constitutional interpretation could be conducted but not a review, Lai could personally step in to negotiate internal disputes or a mass recall movement could be initiated.
Lai declared at the first opportunity that, to uphold the constitutional order, he would use democratic means to address recent legislative actions that deviate from democratic principles. Therefore, tactics like refusing to countersign and refusing to promulgate or review the law contravene the constitutional order and are unacceptable.
So, what democratic means would safeguard Taiwan’s democratic constitutional order?
On Tuesday, as if acting as a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) agent, Fu led KMT and TPP legislators in blocking all seven of Lai’s judicial nominees. Under their malicious reforms, the Constitutional Court would be left in a dysfunctional state. This not only revealed their intent to strangle the very core of Taiwan’s democratic constitutional order, but — even more frighteningly — resembled a legal “democratic coup.”
As Taiwanese face this “democratic coup,” we must abide by the democratic constitutional order to strengthen our democratic immunity.
We must support the DPP’s legislative caucus and the Judicial Yuan — the opposing party in the disputes caused by the KMT and TPP’s malicious amendments to the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法). In accordance with the rights protected under the constitution — separation of powers and judicial independence — both should immediately file suits for a constitutional review and temporary relief.
As Fu and other KMT and TPP members’ self-serving legislation contravenes the principles of democratic electoral agreements and the people’s right to recall, the Executive Yuan should respond with proper constitutional procedures. After Lai promulgates the law, it should file for reconsideration, a constitutional review and temporary relief.
With regard to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法), Fu and other KMT and TPP members are fabricating fiscal disputes between the central and local governments to destabilize Taiwan’s governance and create political division. This would lead to the disproportionate allocation of resources to city and county governments.
To handle this crisis — and before launching a mass recall movement — Taiwanese must unite and combine our efforts to save the Constitutional Court. This is the foundation for safeguarding Taiwan’s democratic constitutional order.
Chen Tsai-neng is a doctoral candidate at National Chung Hsing University’s Graduate Institute of International Politics.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
RSS