Following President Chen Shui-bian's (
However, any pan-blue move to conduct a vote of no confidence in the Cabinet would lead to a dissolution of the legislature, and so we are now entering a temporary balance of terror between the pan-blue and pan-green forces. It remains to be seen how the two opposing camps will strategically place themselves in relation to the other side. Will the pan-blues really push for a no confidence vote against Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌)? And will the pan-greens then support a decision by the president to dissolve the legislature and hold new legislative elections?
The pan-green camp says that so long as there is no vote of no confidence in the Cabinet, then the legislature will not be dissolved, and the more the pan-blues push for a no confidence vote, the more certain it is that the legislature will be dissolved.
The pan-blues, however, think the reverse is true. That is, the pan-blues believe that the pan-greens are so fearful of a crushing defeat in a fresh round of legislative elections that they will not dare run the risk of asking the president to dissolve the legislature. The risk that the pan-blues are running is that the pan-green camp really is determined to dissolve the legislature at any cost.
Have the pan-blues then prepared themselves for the ensuing legislative elections? More importantly, even if the pan-blue camp is right about the green camp's fears, will the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) accept Chen's decision if he nominates Ma to the premiership?
If the pan-greens are sensible, they should understand that they cannot afford to face new legislative elections, because the electorate is no longer on their side. However, according to the Constitution and constitutional precedents set by other nations, the outgoing Cabinet can stay on as a caretaker Cabinet led by the incumbent premier or vice premier, a situation that prevails until the new Cabinet is appointed.
In other words, if the pan-blues successfully topple the Cabinet, they would actually help the pan-greens take advantage of this constitutional opportunity -- they could simply refrain from nominating a premier from either the pan-blue or pan-green camps. If that happens, the pan-green camp will formally be off the hook, while the pan-blues will end up being blamed for staging a political campaign to usurp power. They will not be able to form a Cabinet, and may even lose their support in future elections.
If the president dissolves the legislature following a successful no confidence vote, then new legislative elections will have to be convened within 60 days. Although the pan-greens run the risk of being routed in the ensuing legislative elections, a new round of elections will also catch the pan-blues off guard. The process of redrawing the nation's electoral districts has not been completed yet and any confusion during the campaign will reflect badly on the pan-blues.
The Constitution also allows Chen to submit a request to the Council of Grand Justices to deliver an interpretation of whether the legislature elected following a dissolution is a genuinely "new" legislature (ie, the seventh) or an "interim" legislature, to be retained until the seventh legislature is elected as planned late next year. If the latter, then the pan-blue camp, which might do well in the short term, could face a backlash in the legislative and presidential elections next year and the year after.
Chen Chao-chien is an assistant professor in the department of public affairs at Ming Chuan University.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS