The Constitutional Court on Friday ruled that most of the amendments passed by the legislature to expand its powers of oversight over the executive branch of government are unconstitutional — a major setback for the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP).
After securing a combined majority of legislative seats in February, KMT and TPP legislators drafted the amendments to give themselves investigative powers — to summon government officials and members of the public to testify and provide documents, or else face penalties — and compelling the president to deliver a state of the nation address to the legislature and take questions from them.
The KMT and TPP said the amendments were a “reform” to bolster legislative oversight and information access, but they sparked controversy as many people were concerned that they were a legislative “power grab,” as lawmakers could weaponize the expanded power to intimidate and punish political rivals, and their unfettered document access might jeopardize national security and individual privacy.
The amendments were passed in May and went into effect on June 26, but the Constitutional Court in July issued an injunction to suspend several parts of the amendments.
Friday’s ruling came as a relief to many. However, KMT lawmakers, supported by the TPP, had already started their “backup plan.” The Legislative Yuan on Monday last week passed a preliminary review on a drafted amendment to the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法), proposed by KMT Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling (翁曉玲), specifying that “the total number of incumbent justices” means “15” — the full number of seats on the court. The legislature last month passed a second reading of another amendment to the act, also proposed by Weng, to raise the threshold for Constitutional Court rulings and injunctions to “a two-thirds majority” of the total incumbent justices.
Currently, a Constitutional Court ruling is passed with a two-thirds quorum of incumbent justices and agreement by a simple majority of the quorum. However, if the two drafted amendments are passed, it would require a two-thirds quorum of the full court (10 justices) and agreement from at least two-thirds (seven justices) of the quorum.
The two amendments might not be a big concern to many, but considering that seven of the current justices are set to retire on Thursday, and the legislature dominated by the KMT and TPP has yet to review the nominated candidates, that leaves only eight remaining justices, below the quorum to even hold a hearing.
Serious concerns have been raised that the Constitutional Court could become paralyzed. If the KMT and TPP take this path, it would threaten the normal functioning of Taiwan’s democracy and constitutional system, as it deprives the public of their right to seek a last resort to justice, as well as tip the balance of the separation of powers, as there would be no court to handle disputes between government agencies or check abuses of power.
As the highest court, the Constitutional Court plays a crucial role in ensuring that government branches recognize the limits of their own power. It ensures that even popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm unpopular minorities or undermine the fundamental values guaranteed to all citizens by the Constitution.
The KMT does not seem to care about Taiwan’s constitutional system of government, or intends to paralyze it, as it refuses to review the proposed annual budget. Its legislative caucus on Saturday even blatantly disregarded the court’s ruling as “unconstitutional” and said it is “not obliged to comply with the ruling.”
Facing lawmakers who disrespect the constitutional system and only want to fire the referees (the justices) when they lose the game (the constitutional interpretation), voters should scrutinize whether they are reliable representatives who can speak for the public or merely representatives of a party, willing to sabotage the nation’s development for personal or partisan interests.
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS