Tue, Apr 30, 2024 page8

• Reform bill might face challenges from court

  • By Huang Di-ying 黃帝穎
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Under intense pressure from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Wu Tsung-hsien (吳宗憲), the Legislative Yuan’s Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee has retained all 20 provisions of a controversial legislative reform bill. Motions from Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators to adjourn a review of the bill were vetoed up to 40 times.

  The DPP said that the point-by-point review system in the bill led by opposition parties would create the equivalent of an unjust sports game in the Legislative Yuan.

  The bill contains provisions that would allow legislators to hold fellow lawmakers in contempt and require the president to submit a “State of the Nation” address, in which the president must answer legislators’ questions. If the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party force through its passage, the bill might ultimately face a Constitutional Court review.

  Under Article 49 of the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法), if one-quarter or more of legislators believe a statutory law contravenes the Constitution, they can petition the court for a ruling.

  The “presidential interpellation” portion of the bill is evidently unconstitutional under the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (中華民國憲法增修條文), which clearly outline the interpellation rights of legislators regarding the premier and other officials, but does not give the legislature similar rights regarding the president.

  While Article 4 of the additional articles states that when the Legislative Yuan convenes each year, it may hear a report on the state of the nation by the president, Article 3 specifies that legislators only “have the right to interpellate the president of the Executive Yuan and the heads of ministries and other organizations under the Executive Yuan.”

  Prior to the constitutional amendment that abolished the Control Yuan, the reform bill’s “contempt of the legislature” provision would have encroached on the Control Yuan’s power to investigate and hold officials accountable. This is in direct contravention of Constitutional Interpretation No. 325.

  Moreover, the bill would seek to arbitrarily impose criminal liability on citizens and public officials, despite Constitutional Interpretation No. 585 clearly stating that the Legislative Yuan only has the power to impose fines.

  The US’ Contempt of Congress rules strictly maintain “due process.” Contempt citations can be referred to a grand jury as a final check on the legitimacy of prosecutions, imposing a level of checks and balances on the powers of Congress.

  However, the blue-white coalition’s bill ignores such concepts.

  Constitutional Interpretation No. 599 states that “in the event of any continuance of doubt or dispute regarding constitutional provisions, the application of a law or regulation in dispute ... which may cause irreparable harm to any fundamental right of the people, fundamental constitutional principle or any other major public interest, the Constitutional Court may ... grant provisional remedies to provide injunctive relief prior to the delivery of an interpretation if it is imminent and necessary and no other means is available to prevent the harm, and the interests in granting the provisional remedies clearly outweigh those in not granting the remedies.”

  When the blue-white coalition’s unconstitutional bill passes its third reading, the Constitutional Court would have the right to take temporary disciplinary action to protect Taiwan’s democratic Constitution.

  Huang Di-ying is a lawyer and a decisionmaking member of the Taiwan National Alliance.

  Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
• Most Popular

  • 1

    TSMC cannot make 2nm chips abroad now: MOEA

  • 2

    Videos about Taiwan upset China: source

  • 3

    Typhoon Usagi expected to brush past Taiwan

  • 4

    First new MRT line train arrives

  • 5

    Taiwan in Time: The rise and fall of Taipei’s sky bridges