In 1781, leery of creating a strong central government that might mirror the British monarchy they had just rejected, the American colonists drew up the Articles of Confederation. Within a few short years, the citizens of this new democracy realized that the states-centered government they had established was not a viable vehicle for the dynamic times they faced.
Wary of too much centralized power, the Articles had purposely established a constitution that vested the largest share of power to the individual states. Each state retained its "sovereignty, freedom and independence." No executive or judicial branches of government were set up. Instead there was a committee of delegates representing each state that was responsible for conducting foreign affairs. But this "Continental Congress" was denied the power to collect taxes or enforce laws.
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 first set out to amend the original Articles, but delegates soon understood that a new constitution was needed. The new structure of government was a form of federalism that gave more power to the national government and established a system of checks and balances within that governmental structure.
The convention had done its work behind closed doors and with its adjournment the new constitution was submitted for ratification. A rich, rigorous debate followed and newspapers filled with political essays.
Anti-federalists argued that the Constitution would come too close to making a king of the president, worried that it favored the rich, that it denied individual rights to citizens because it lacked a bill of rights. The political logjam was finally broken when the federalists agreed to add a bill of rights if the states would first ratify the Constitution.
The US Constitution has been amended many times since its inception.
The EU is currently debating a new constitution as well and the variety of views on it is as disparate as were those in the US debate. German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer has declared, "For me, the constitution is the most important treaty since the foundation of the European Economic Community."
Others believe the current draft is deficient. European Commission President Romano Prodi said, "Despite all the hard work we have put into this, the text that is now before us simply lacks vision and ambition." Who said democracy would be easy?
President Chen Shui-bian (
There are those who prefer to amend the worn-out 1947 ROC Constitution, just as some members of the Constitutional Congress wanted to update the Articles of Confederation. Attempts to amend the ROC Constitution in the 1990s simply did not provide the kind of balance and clarity needed to meet Taiwan's current realities. It's time for a change.
As in Philadelphia and Brussels, Taiwan must put its best minds to work to craft the new constitution. Chen is correct to call for the involvement of all political parties, constitutional experts, academics and citizens in this constitutional process. The result will provide Taiwan with the long-term stability it needs.
Having learned from the American and European experiences, Taiwan's process of constitutional reform can be a model for the PRC. Clearly the PRC has a long way to go in its current "reform" process, as the recent announcement of a possible constitutional change from a Central Committee meeting of the Chinese Communist Party shows.
At a typically secretive annual planning session, the leaders stated their desire to see written "into the Constitution the ideology and broad objectives established at the 16th Party Congress, so that the Constitution better expresses our Basic Law." Their communique suggests that the Constitution will include private property protection as a right. This seems to reflect the approach of President Hu Jintao (
The National People's Assembly will be called upon to rubber-stamp this decision, presuming all the jockeying within the party's factions simmers down and they come to an agreement.
In contrast to this opaque process, Chen has proposed a transparent, open, and inclusive process that will produce a new constitution that meets the needs of all Taiwan's citizens. Taiwan has learned well from the US and Europe. Now it is Taiwan's time to shine and bring some light to its neighbor across the Taiwan Strait and to the world in general.
Wu Ming-chi is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS