Mon, Aug 05, 2024 page2

• Court should exercise self-restraint: academics

  • Staff writer, with CNA
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Legal academics have called on the Constitutional Court to exercise restraint when reviewing a case about the constitutionality of amendments to government oversight laws passed by the Legislature at the end of May.

  At a discussion on Friday co-hosted by the Republic of China Constitutional Law Society, attorney and Soochow University law professor Nigel Li (李念祖) said the legislature should be allowed sufficient latitude in crafting legislation.

  A judicial ruling shackling the legislative body’s operations risks undermining the democratic system, Li said.

  

  The Constitutional Court holds a preliminary hearing for an injunction against the enforcement of controversial legal amendments in Taipei on July 10.

  Photo: CNA

  He was referring to the case brought by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus, the Cabinet, President William Lai (賴清德) and the Control Yuan in a bid to reject oversight laws that took effect on June 26.

  The Constitutional Court has already issued an injunction that halted enforcement of some of the revisions, including those that would have given legislators much broader investigative powers.

  The amendments to the Act Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法) and the Criminal Code were pushed through by opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party lawmakers, who together form a majority in the legislature.

  The DPP-affiliated petitioners maintained that the deliberation that led up to the laws’ passage were unconstitutional, arguing that there was a lack of substantive discussions and that ruling party lawmakers were deprived of opportunities to express their views.

  The petitioners also sought to challenge the constitutionality of many of the adopted measures, including those expanding the legislature’s investigative powers and requiring the president to address the legislature periodically and answer questions.

  However, Li cited the court’s previous rulings, saying the court had in the past shown great respect for the “principle of legislative autonomy” provided that the legislative process did not contain “manifest and gross procedural flaws.”

  The Constitutional Court, when trying to arbitrate constitutional disputes between top government agencies, as in the oversight law case, should refrain from assuming a “too active” role, he said.

  Instead, the Constitutional Court should adopt a “minimalist” approach, he said, suggesting that the court render a ruling limited to the specific issues of the case and avoid setting broad precedents.

  Political science professor Su Tzu-chiao (蘇子喬) and law professor Yang Chih-chieh (楊智傑) expressed similar views, saying the court should refrain from excessive intervention in the ongoing disputes between the opposition-led legislature and the petitioning agencies.

  Su, also from Soochow University, said the new measures requiring the president’s presence at the legislature to deliver an annual state of the nation address and then answer questions would not undermine the constitutional system.

  Rather, they would provide an opportunity to “clarify” the confusion in the division of responsibilities between the president and the premier, he said.

  However, Lai has maintained that according to the Constitution, the president is not accountable to the Legislative Yuan and that the head of state can volunteer, but has no obligation, to address the legislature.

  Friday’s discussion was cohosted by the National Policy Foundation — a think tank affiliated with the KMT — and the Taiwan Administrative Law Association.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Police identify man who engaged in indecency at park

  • 2

    Taiwan’s GDP per capita lead fuels South Korean unease

  • 3

    McDonald’s to raise prices on select items from May 27

  • 4

    Wildlife cam sex scene drawing copycats, visitors

  • 5

    Trump weighs Taiwan arms package