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.
There appears to be a growing view among leaders and leading thinkers in Taiwan that their words and actions have no influence over how China approaches cross-Strait relations. According to this logic, China’s actions toward Taiwan are guided by China’s unwavering ambition to assert control over Taiwan. Many also believe Beijing’s approach is influenced by China’s domestic politics. As the thinking goes, former President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) made a good faith effort to demonstrate her moderation on cross-Strait issues throughout her tenure. During her 2016 inaugural address, Tsai sent several constructive signals, including by acknowledging the historical fact of interactions and
HSBC Holdings successfully fought off a breakup campaign by disgruntled Asian investors in recent years. Now, it has announced a restructuring along almost the same east-west lines. The obvious question is why? It says it is designed to create a simpler, more efficient and dynamic company. However, it looks a lot like the bank is also facing up to the political reality of the growing schism between the US and China. A new structure would not dissolve HSBC’s geopolitical challenges, but it could give the bank better options to respond quickly if things worsen. HSBC spent 2022 battling to convince shareholders of
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
China’s “Joint Sword-2024B” military exercises around Taiwan last week have sparked concerns in Taipei and allied capitals that Beijing’s risk tolerance is increasing, and rather than prioritizing efforts toward “peaceful unification,” it is ramping up efforts to bring about unification by force, whether that be a military quarantine, blockade or full-scale invasion. Catherine Lila Chou (周怡齡) and Mark Harrison are right in their recent book Revolutionary Taiwan: Making Nationhood in a Changing World Order that the nature of Beijing’s one-party political system, in which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is always right, means Taiwanese identity is explained away as being the
RSS