The National Assembly has successfully ratified constitutional amendments which, among other things, mandate the assembly's permanent dissolution. This is the seventh round of constitutional revision in the last 14 years, and the final round to be presided over by the National Assembly.
The National Assembly's right to amend the Constitution -- including the definition of national boundaries -- will be given to the legislature, and such changes will be ratified by a national vote. Its right to initiate an impeachment of the president and vice-president will now also be passed on to the legislature, with such cases to be decided by the Council of Grand Justices.
Other achievements of this last National Assembly include extending the term for legislators from three to four years to coincide with the terms of the President and Vice-President. The right of women to participate in politics is further bolstered, with 50 percent quotas for legislators-at-large and overseas Chinese legislators from all parties. The reduction of the legislature from 225 to 113 seats starting from 2008 is a punishment meted out by voters to Taiwan's lazy and irresponsible legislators. But because of the smaller numbers of seats, the legislature will become more vulnerable to manipulation by financial interests.
The adoption of the single-member district, two vote system for the election has been criticized by Taiwan's smaller parties, for the single-member district works to the advantage of the larger parties. Critics say that it will lead to a face-off between the two large parties in which the voice of smaller parties is drowned out, reducing the diversity of opinion. Supporters of the system say that under the the new system, legislators will be more representative of the electorate, and the legislature will be led by politicians with strong roots in local communities. This will make it difficult for political extremists to get elected, and the political parties will have to show greater respect for local opinion.
We believe the purpose of a constitution is to ensure and uphold the highest interests of all citizens. Therefore, the articles of the Constitution must be amended according to the changing needs of the people, with a new constitution created if necessary. Although the amendment of the Constitution has achieved substantial results, it is regrettable that due to the requirement that amendments in the future be ratified by a three-quarters legislative majority, we now have one of the highest thresholds in the world for changing the Constitution. Even if proposals surmount this barrier, they then need the consent of half the total electorate. This makes some people pessimistic about the feasibility of the next round of constitutional reform.
But constitutional reform must continue if Taiwan's constitutional chaos is to be resolved. According to the Presidential Office's proposal, the next round of constitutional revision will help determine whether the country should have a three-branch or five-branch government, and clarify whether the executive branch is a presidential or cabinet system. It will also address issues that are closely related to peoples' everyday lives, such as the abolition of the Taiwan Provincial Government, the lowering of the voting age, reduction in the length of mandatory military service, inclusion of labor rights in the constitution and Aboriginal welfare.
Clearly, all of these issues have nothing to do with Taiwanese independence. Setting a high threshold will only impede the operation of Taiwan's Constitution and deprive people of the exercise of their democratic rights. In the future, the legislature should therefore quickly seek to lower this threshold to avoid future constitutional conflict and prevent the country from becoming an international laughingstock.
Taiwan's constitutional reform has gotten this far, and there is no reason to stop now. No matter how difficult it may be to reach the next stage of revision, we believe that public opinion in Taiwan will support those who uphold continuous constitutional reform and relegate into the dustbin of history those who oppose the people's will.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS