Disregarding derision from several quarters, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has pushed out Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) to force his way into the KMT chairmanship.
Ma’s decision attracted criticism throughout the pan-green camp and also caused a considerable backlash in the pan-blue camp over concerns that he might centralize power — but he could not care less.
Despite the fact that former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) all concurrently held the chairmanship of their parties at some time, the phenomenon runs counter to the spirit of democratic constitutionalism.
In accordance with the division of powers in a democratic constitutional government, the president of a democracy should not concurrently serve as a party chairman who has actual power.
Although the US president is an acting party chairman, the affiliations of US political parties are loosely formed and do not feature fixed members or strict party discipline, nor can they put restraints on congressional members whose role it is to supervise the president.
This is not the case here. Most Taiwanese parties are quite rigidly structured; a party chairman, for example, can nominate legislators — and legislators-at-large in particular. If the president doubles as party chair, the separation of powers under a presidential system devolves, as does the legitimacy created by separate elections for the presidency and the legislature.
In a semi-presidential system, the president holds real power but serves as a non-partisan protector of the constitutional order and an arbitrator amid partisan and political conflict. Thus, the president should not assume the role of party chairman. This is the reason why, as soon as a president of France is sworn in, he must vacate his party posts.
In a democracy, the Cabinet and the legislature do not necessarily have to be separate, so if Ma feels that the executive and legislative branches are not fully cooperating with him, then he should change the system of government by amending the Constitution and introducing a parliamentary system rather than sticking with the semi-presidential system and doubling as party chairman.
He could then lead legislators directly in his capacity as party chairman and as parliamentary leader without concerns over the separation of powers.
Rather than saying Ma’s unimpressive political performance is a result of the uncooperativeness of various ministries, it would be more correct to say that this is more a problem of policy. If he does not solve the problem at the source, destroying the spirit of democratic constitutionalism by doubling as party chairman will not be much help.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should, of course, harshly criticize Ma, but it should also remember that it amended its party charter to allow Chen to double as party chairman. Before calling for a constitutional interpretation by the Council of Grand Justices, the DPP should admit to its mistakes.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
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