On Tuesday, the Legislative Yuan approved the longest session extension in its history, lasting a full two months. That decision was made without any explanation. While prolonging a legislative session is not uncommon, doing so without transparency raises serious concerns about motives and accountability.
Last year’s extension into mid-July had a clear and legitimate purpose. With the administration of President William Lai (賴清德) newly in office, the Legislative Yuan needed to receive and review the executive branch’s policy agenda. That extension was logical and necessary. It honored the principle of democratic transition and allowed the new government to present its vision. This year, no such justification has been offered. If lawmakers truly need more time to handle urgent legislation, why not call an extraordinary session — a constitutionally authorized mechanism that requires a defined agenda? Why resort to an open-ended extension that evades public scrutiny?
What makes the decision more troubling is that many of the lawmakers who backed the extension are the same ones who rarely show up for executive interpellation.
A report by Citizen Congress Watch showed that the 10 legislators with the lowest oral interpellation rates in the previous session all voted in favor of the extension. They were all affiliated with either the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP).
The two opposition parties hold a legislative majority, giving them control over key procedures and schedules. With that power comes the duty to lead responsibly and transparently. Yet the rationale behind this year’s extension remains vague at best. Many of the lawmakers involved have a track record of skipping oversight sessions. Their sudden enthusiasm for extending legislative time raises a fair question: Is this truly about productivity, or is it a political maneuver?
There is a misunderstanding that legislative recess equals vacation. In truth, it is a period free from daily committee and floor meetings, offering lawmakers valuable time for other essential duties. These include visits to local districts, policy discussions with academics and experts, consultations with civil society groups and drafting legislation.
A recess also provides a critical window for parliamentary diplomacy. As China increases pressure to marginalize Taiwan internationally, legislators must represent Taiwan abroad. Earlier this year, Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) led a cross-party delegation to the US to attend US President Donald Trump’s inauguration ceremony. In February, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Chen Kuan-ting (陳冠廷) received an award at France’s Future Leaders Invitation Program, where he met with experts in aerospace and strategic policy. These initiatives help bolster Taiwan’s international relationships and visibility. They require time and careful planning, both of which become harder under an extended session.
By arbitrarily prolonging the legislative calendar, lawmakers risk displacing these meaningful efforts and losing opportunities for outreach and engagement in their constituencies.
Taiwanese welcome lawmakers who are willing to work harder for the public good, but that work must be rooted in transparency and have a clear purpose. This year’s session extension has neither. Without a stated rationale, it appears more like a delay tactic than a genuine effort to serve the public.
If KMT and TPP legislators truly intend to act in the public’s interest, it must begin with honesty. Otherwise, this extension would be seen not as public service, but as political evasion. The public deserves better.
Gahon Chiang is a congressional staff member in the office of DPP Legislator Chen Kuan-ting, focusing on Taiwan’s national security policy.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS