The Constitutional Court on Wednesday last week held a preparatory hearing for an injunction request to halt the enforcement of controversial new amendments to government oversight laws.
Constitutional Court oral arguments are scheduled for Aug. 6 on the constitutionality of amendments to the Act Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法) and the Criminal Code, which were passed on May 28 by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers.
The amendments were signed into law on June 24 and promulgated on June 26.
However, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus, the Executive Yuan, President William Lai (賴清德) and the Control Yuan separately filed for a ruling on the constitutionality of the amendments, and also petitioned for an injunction.
Fifteen Constitutional Court justices were present at the hearing, which was broadcast live, and legal representatives of the four petitioners and the Legislative Yuan presented their claims and counterclaims.
Legal representatives of the four petitioners said the amendments have major flaws and are likely to cause irreparable harm to the Constitutional order.
They said the amendments pose dangers to the semi-presidential system, the separation of powers, responsible politics, and the judiciary and Control Yuan’s investigative and adjudicative powers, while the disclosure of confidential government information would cause irreparable harm.
The legislature’s representatives said the amendments aim to strengthen popular sovereignty, responsible politics and improve the quality of the Legislative Yuan’s decisions.
The amendments would not cause any irreparable harm to the constitutional order, they said.
After the three-hour hearing, some KMT lawmakers said they did not have enough time to prepare and the Cabinet should not be allowed to file for a Constitutional interpretation after the legislature rejected its request for reconsideration.
Some KMT lawmakers complained that the legislature’s representatives were asked by a justice whether lawmakers have legal supremacy over the Executive Yuan and the Constitutional Court.
TPP caucus whip Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) failed to answer a justice’s question on the definition of “counterquestioning” which was mentioned in the amendments.
It is concerning that KMT and TPP lawmakers are already trying to discredit the justices, with Huang beginning his presentation by showing a slide that reads “court justices shouldn’t be the guardian deity of a certain political party,” and telling reporters that the “host, cohost and referees” are on the same side and “everyone who watched the broadcast could see the justices had a stance.”
KMT Legislator Wu Tsung-hsien (吳宗憲) said it was unfair that the four petitioners had more representatives in total than the legislature, while fellow KMT Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling (翁曉玲) said it was an unfair trial, which the opposition parties did not have time to prepare for, and they felt “besieged.”
However, ironically, the opposition’s amendments require the president and public officials to immediately answer their questions with no time to prepare.
Despite tens of thousands of protesters’ and hundreds of legal experts’ calls to halt the amendments so that there could be sufficient discussion, the opposition passed them. When asked by a reporter about the definition of “counterquestioning,” Wu said the opposition would “properly explain [the definition] to the people after the bills become laws,” underlining the ambiguity of the amendments.
The opposition lawmakers’ remarks only highlight how they rushed to push through the amendments, disregarding any calls for further deliberation.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS