The “Great Recall” movement — targeting 31 legislators, more than one-fourth of the Legislative Yuan — marked a milestone in Taiwan’s constitutional history. While the results might not have shifted parliamentary power, the campaign’s institutional, social and geopolitical effects highlight a crucial turning point in the nation’s democratic development.
For years, Taiwan’s recall system had been largely symbolic — constrained by high thresholds and organizational barriers. This recall attempt broke the mold. It showed rising civic consciousness and demand for accountability beyond quadrennial elections. Citizens used constitutional tools to express dissatisfaction with lawmakers’ behavior — especially actions seen as undemocratic or contrary to national interest.
Targeting Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and allied opposition legislators, the movement was not simply partisan, it responded to dysfunction: budget blocks, attempts at a premier ouster and unilateral power grabs. It also marked a shift from candidate-based to behavior-based judgement.
The recall was a defense against Chinese influence, too. Lawmakers seen as aligned with Beijing faced electoral backlash. The message was clear: Taiwan’s sovereignty and democracy are non-negotiable.
More significant was deepening polarization rooted in national identity. Recall supporters and opponents did not divide neatly by party lines, but by positions on China, reform and sovereignty.
Media dynamics intensified this split. Chinese disinformation, social media echo chambers and partisan rhetoric promoted an “us vs them” mindset. Appeals became moral: “If you support this legislator, you do not love Taiwan.” This framing pushed out moderates and discouraged centrist participation, empowering mobilized extremes.
Although the recall failed, it left a political impact. Lawmakers are more cautious, especially on issues such as defense, China and constitutional reform.
At the same time, the legislature’s moral authority weakened. If many lawmakers are seen as disconnected from public sentiment, the Legislative Yuan risks losing institutional credibility. This opens a space for the executive branch.
This might also prompt broader reform — curbing legislative abuse and clarifying the rules about no-confidence votes or procedural overreach. The recall could pave the way for amending constitutional or legislative provisions to restore balance.
A recall is a high-risk, but vital democratic tool. It tests institutional strength, civil society engagement and a divided society’s ability to pursue reform. The level of participation showed that the movement was not driven by partisanship, but by a belief in accountability and resilience under authoritarian pressure.
Beijing watched closely. A successful recall would have shown that Taiwanese could reject unification-leaning politicians. However, a failed one lets China say that the ruling party misused democratic tools.
To the US and other democratic partners, this sends a mixed message. It affirms Taiwanese civic vitality, but raises concerns about polarization, populism and internal gridlock.
I supported the recall, because democracy must be stress-tested. Institutions must enable mid-term accountability. When elected officials undermine defense, invite foreign influence or erode checks and balances, citizens need recourse.
Recalls carry risks — division, populism and distrust — but with reform and civic education, they can bolster democratic resilience.
This recall is not the end, but a beginning. Taiwan’s next challenge is turning this political awakening into lasting reform and democratic renewal in the face of authoritarian threats.
Bonnie Yushih Liao is an assistant professor at Tamkang University.
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
RSS