Constitutional frameworks
A distinction between Taiwanese self-determination on the one hand, and the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution on the other, was revealed by how president-elect William Lai’s (賴清德) post-election speech was translated into English (“Presidential Election: Lai’s victory sparks jubilation,” Jan. 14, page 1). The interpreter first said: “I will act in accordance with our democratic and free constitutional order,” but this was soon corrected to “the ROC constitutional framework.”
The former wording was hardly a slip of the tongue. A touchstone for defensive democracy in constitutional law is the term of art “freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung” (自由民主憲政秩序 or liberal democratic basic order) pioneered by the German Basic Law (“Ko’s latest proposal a non-starter for Kinmen,” Sept. 16, 2023, page 8).
In Taiwan, this phrase (自由民主憲政秩序) appeared in Constitutional Interpretation No. 499 (March 24, 2000), a case about amending the constitution (“National Assembly reforms debated,” April 2, 2000, page 3; additionally, “Ma’s idea of National Day has no basis in law,” Oct. 13, 2022, page 8). It connotes an aspiration to the universal principle of self-determination through democracy and the rule of law.
The latter wording was no coincidence either. The Chinese Civil War framing relegates Taiwan to a domestic affair for China and dissuades international intervention. That is why it has been championed by both Chinese parties — the Chinese Communist Party in China and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in Taiwan, as Li Thian-hok (李天福) pointed out as early as 1958 (“Book review: A Taiwan Advocate in the US,” Aug. 27, 2020, page 14). That is also why, when President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was first elected eight years ago, Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) demanded that she respect “their own constitution” (“China’s mention of ROC Constitution no landmark: academic,” March 1, 2016, page 3).
The Tsai administration strengthened international support for Taiwan while keeping to the ROC constitutional “status quo” by emphasizing that neither side of the Taiwan Strait is subordinate to the other. It remains to be seen how president-elect Lai, the pragmatic worker for Taiwan’s independence, will navigate this terrain.
Te Khai-su
Helsinki, Finland
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Having enjoyed contributing regular essays to the Liberty Times and Taipei Times now for several years, I feel it is time to pull back. As some of my readers know, I have enjoyed a decades-long relationship with Taiwan. My most recent visit was just a few months ago, when I was invited to deliver a keynote speech at a major conference in Taipei. Unfortunately, my trip intersected with Double Ten celebrations, so I missed the opportunity to call on friends in government, as well as colleagues in the new AIT building, that replaced the old Xin-yi Road complex. I have
On New Year’s Day, it is customary to reflect on what the coming year might bring and how the past has brought about the current juncture. Just as Taiwan is preparing itself for what US president-elect Donald Trump’s second term would mean for its economy, national security and the cross-strait “status quo” this year, the passing of former US president Jimmy Carter on Monday at the age of 100 brought back painful memories of his 1978 decision to stop recognizing the Republic of China as the seat of China in favor of the People’s Republic of China. It is an
After forcing through a slew of controversial amendments, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Tuesday last week rejected all seven Constiutional Court candidates nominated by President William Lai (賴清德), an event that triggered public concerns that it could lead to an unprecedented constitutional crisis and jeopardize Taiwan’s democracy. The opposition parties on Dec. 20 forced through three controversial amendments to the Public Officials Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法), the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) and the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法). The amendment to tighten the recall process has been
RSS