Legislators and the president are elected officials, so they should abide by the constitutional system and be held accountable for their decisions made on behalf of the public. That is how a representative democracy and constitutional government should work.
Neither the president nor the legislature should contravene the Constitution, infringe on the rights of other constitutional authorities, disregard people’s rights or behave unscrupulously. If either creates trouble, it would be restrained by other constitutional authorities and a judgement by the Constitutional Court. If the chaos continues, the public has no choice but to take action to remove the troublemakers from power, holding them accountable politically and legally. This demonstrates popular sovereignty and a responsible government.
As the public is the source of the government’s power and authority, it naturally has a say in the disputes between the executive and the legislative branches, and can hold the instigators accountable.
The public is well aware of the attempts by the opposition parties to distort the constitution and confuse right and wrong.
Which branch has been abusing its power and contravening the Constitution? Is it not the legislature?
The Legislative Yuan passed amendments to the Act Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法) to expand its own authority. After it rejected the Executive Yuan’s request to reconsider the amendments, the DPP caucus, the Executive Yuan, the Presidential Office and the Control Yuan took it to the Constitutional Court, which declared the bill unconstitutional.
However, the opposition parties amended the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法) and rejected all seven of President William Lai’s (賴清德) nominees for the Constitutional Court in a bid to paralyze it. The legislature passed amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法), allocating NT$370 billion (US$11.29 billion) to local governments, which is going to have a huge effect on the central government’s fiscal planning.
It passed this year’s central government budget with record cuts to national defense, social welfare, healthcare, social security, education, culture and operating fees in an attempt to tie the government down even further.
It also passed amendments to the Public Officials Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法) to restrict the right of the public to recall elected officials.
It is obvious who the troublemakers are.
Following the Lunar New Year holiday, the effects of the budget cuts have become crystal clear. The Executive Yuan’s central, southern and eastern Joint Services Centers can only maintain the most basic level of operations. The Ministry of Health and Welfare’s budget to promote disease prevention has been slashed, undermining its campaigns to encourage immunization and healthy diets. Budgets for workers taking leave to get pregnancy checkups or accompany their partner, and paternity leave wage subsidies have been slashed or frozen, affecting the rights and interests of first-time parents and small enterprises.
The Legislative Yuan continues to sow chaos, but the public is not helpless. People can exercise their right of recall as granted by Article 17 of the Constitution to restore order and restart the legislature.
There is no need for political parties to bicker over who is causing the trouble. They should accept the scrutiny and leave it to the voters to decide.
Yao Meng-chang is an assistant professor in Fu Jen Catholic University’s Department of Postgraduate Legal Studies.
Translated by Fion Khan
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
On Monday last week, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Raymond Greene met with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers to discuss Taiwan-US defense cooperation, on the heels of a separate meeting the previous week with Minister of National Defense Minister Wellington Koo (顧立雄). Departing from the usual convention of not advertising interactions with senior national security officials, the AIT posted photos of both meetings on Facebook, seemingly putting the ruling and opposition parties on public notice to obtain bipartisan support for Taiwan’s defense budget and other initiatives. Over the past year, increasing Taiwan’s defense budget has been a sore spot
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had