Like the more advanced liberal democracies of the West, Taiwan's is an adversarial political system, in which the very nature of an opposition party is to oppose the government.
But where Taiwan's system veers away from the liberal democratic traditions of the West is the pan-blue camp's bitter stubbornness in the role of opposition. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party's (PFP) opposition to bills proposed by President Chen Shui-bian's (
The turf-war like rivalry in the nation's legislature has brought it to a new low. The latest legislative session, which drew to a close on May 31, succeeded in passing an abysmally low number of bills. With just 39 bills made into law, it was the poorest performance ever -- breaking the previous record low of 53.
The opposition, with its numerical majority in the legislature, is to blame for this record. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been in power for more than five years now, and the pan-blue camp has controlled the legislature for the same amount of time. During that time, legislative sessions have brought about the passage of double, and even triple the number of bills passed in the last sitting. In the two sessions in 2003, for example, the turbulent lawmaking body passed 206 bills into law.
Even with the flurry of controversy surrounding last year's presidential election, a similarly combative legislature voted 75 bills into law. Convinced Chen's re-election was illegitimate and unfair, the pan-blue camp refused to review any bills proposed by the Cabinet in the relevant committees, and persisted in stalling them with their majority in the legislature's procedure committee. For a time after March 20 last year, KMT and PFP legislators simply sat on their hands, rejected new legislation and voted down any bill that made it to the legislative floor.
This begs the question: How could a legislature in which the majority of lawmakers are interested only in contesting the presidential election and bringing the government to a standstill be able to pass more bills than the most recent legislative session?
The simple answer is that even though they harbored a bitter hatred for their pan-green rivals, pan-blue camp legislators knew they could not simply write off the two-and-a-half months remaining in that legislative session. There were, after all, important bills to be considered -- and they would have been held responsible if the Political Donations Law (
Despite the record low number of bills passed, the just-completed legislative session is not without some modest success. Lawmakers were able to temporarily set aside their hatred and pass an amendment to the Law on the National Assembly's Exercise of Power (
But the last legislative session will be remembered for what was not passed. Only one of the Cabinet's five priority bills (the National Assembly law) got anywhere. The other four never even made it to a first reading.
On the last day of the session, Premier Frank Hsieh (
The legislative gridlock can, for the most part, be attributed to the usual blue-green political wrangling and boycotts. But other, more unique factors were also at play. For instance, the KMT caucus halted cross-party negotiations last month to protest the investigation into party Vice Chairman Chiang Pin-kung's(
Much of the business of crafting legislation also fell by the wayside as a result of the many pan-blue "side jobs," as DPP caucus whip Chen Chin-jun(
The consequences of the continuing legislative impasse could range from minor to far-reaching. But what is alarming is that the virtual paralysis of the lawmaking body has completely halted the functioning of another branch of the government. The Control Yuan -- the government's watchdog -- has literally sat empty for the last five months because the pan-blue camp has repeatedly rejected the list of nominees, primarily out of a dislike of individual candidates.
The legislature's poor performance will have repercussions for Taiwan's strategic military alliance with the US, and could even compromise the nation's security. Retired US air force lieutenant colonel and defense expert Mark Stokes said in an April interview with the Taipei Times that US policymakers might review the way it deals with Taiwan should the special arms procurement budget fail to pass in the legislature. Stokes acknowledged that there was a "very strong likelihood" that the US government will be less willing to approve future requests from Taiwan for the purchase of major weapons systems.
Stokes said that the pan-blue camp's continued boycott of the arms purchase deal and its unwillingness to compromise on the issue signaled "a negative attitude" among the opposition parties with regard to the defense of Taiwan. "Historians are likely to place at least part of the blame on a KMT leadership that sacrificed long-term interests for short-term political gains," he said.
Stokes was correct in asserting that the pan-blue-camp's stonewalling could have serious consequences for the fate of the nation. At times, its complacence and boycotts border on contempt for the legislative process.
It is unfortunate that one of the provisions the National Assembly ratified last week when it passed the package of constitutional amendments was voting itself out of existence. Legislators could learn from the now-defunct decision-making body. Despite the boycotts and media-conscious antics from members of smaller parties, the assembly accomplished its task efficiently and ahead of schedule. At a time when inefficiency is the norm, it's a pity that Taiwan had to lose its second chamber -- a place where things actually get done.
Mark Kennedy is a freelance writer based in Taipei.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS