We have seen a lot of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), as have legislators.
They have been grappling with it, and each other as a result, throughout the seventh Legislative Yuan session. So much so that the process has spilled over into a post-recess special legislative session, meeting the same fate as the amendments to the Local Government Act (地方制度法), which had been passed in the previous session earlier this year. So once again, we have the spectacle of legislators from both parties reduced to scrapping in the nation’s legislature playing on our TV screens, yet more ammunition for the foreign press to use to gawk in wonder at what passes for politics in Taiwan.
Legislators on both sides seem to view parliament as a battlefield on which to wage their political warfare. Far be it for them to actually engage in rational political debate in the interests of arriving at a satisfactory conclusion. We would not, I think, be overly remiss in wishing they would conduct themselves in a way more suited to the spirit of democracy. Nor, I feel, could we blame ourselves for having strong reservations about how the special legislative sessions have been handled. A glaring example of this was the session carried out in the absence of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators after they walked out last month. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) took advantage of the empty seats, seizing the opportunity to unilaterally rush through a number of controversial laws in a clear show of their disdain for the democratic process. It’s quite depressing, really.
The fact is that these sessions should only be called under special circumstances or in emergencies. According to Articles 68 and 69 of the Constitution, the legislature is to meet for two sessions every year and special sessions can only be called for two reasons — the first when the president seeks a consultative session; the second when a quarter or more legislators agree to it. In the entire history of constitutional government in Taiwan, there have only been 13 occasions on which a special session has been called. The first was in 1951, followed by another the next year, and then there were the politically tumultuous years between 2000 and 2008, when the DPP was in power. This period saw no less than eight sessions. That leaves three for the recent seventh session, with another slated for this month. This is a record number of special sessions.
In our capacity as monitors to the legislature, it falls on us to ask: Who gave legislators the right to drag their heels during normal sessions just so they can abuse special sessions to play catch-up? The legislature is playing with fire here, risking the whole edifice of constitutional government going up in flames. One wrong move and we could have a constitutional crisis on our hands.
Even though the KMT allowed the existence of the Young China Party and the China Democratic Socialist Party, both minor, legally recognized political parties, during the Martial Law period, they have once again, even in the 21st century, overseen a transition to a virtual one-party legislature. This outrageous state of affairs is a slap in the face to the constitutional government system that took so long to build. One piece of legislation that was passed in such conditions was the Rural Revitalization Act (農村再生條例), which encountered all kinds of problems the moment it was passed. If that ran into problems, one can only imagine what’s going to happen to the planned amendments to the demarcations of legislative constituencies that the KMT still wants to slip through in the next special session.
What with the ruling and opposition parties being at each others’ throats, it is going to be difficult to see any budgets and laws passed. These special sessions are on shaky ground vis-a-vis our constitutional democracy. The public will have to keep its eye on the people who are supposed to be representing them in the Legislative Yuan.
We ask the DPP not to withdraw from the special session. We also call on the ruling and opposition parties to work together and not get distracted by legislation other than the ECFA. It is important to break the mold of the failed special session. Democracy is still quite fragile in this country, and we must handle it with care.
Ku Chung-hwa is chairman of Citizens’ Congress Watch.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS