On May 28, 2024, the Legislative Yuan of the Republic of China continued the fourth day of reviewing the amendment related to parliamentary powers after sessions on the 17th, 21st, and 24th. The amendment to the exercise of legislative powers passed the third reading in some sections of the Legislative Yuan’s Power Exercise Act. Outside the Legislative Yuan, citizens held a protest. The organizers announced that as of 9:25 pm, the number of protesters on-site had exceeded 70,000.
The Legislative Yuan of the Republic of China continued to process the parliamentary power amendment bills proposed by the Kuomintang (Blue) and People First Party (White) today. The Blue and White parties occupied the chairman’s podium as soon as the session began, with lawmakers from both sides shouting slogans across the hall. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) continued to demand the bills be sent back for review using roll-call votes, repeated votes, full review of the bill, and delaying tactics.
Early in the morning, Taiwanese civic groups gathered outside the Legislative Yuan under the rain, chanting slogans such as “Oppose parliamentary secrecy,” “No discussion, no democracy,” “Against parliamentary abuse of power,” and “Demand bill withdrawal,” while tying protest banners to the fences surrounding the parliament to voice their demands.
By midday today, the Legislative Yuan had processed a total of 8 articles (including adding one section title). The Legislative Yuan continued its session at 1 pm with the DPP lawmakers raising a motion to adjourn around 3 pm, shouting slogans like “No discussion, adjourn now.” However, the motion to adjourn was rejected by the Blue and White parties through a joint vote. Subsequently, the Blue and White parties passed a proposal to extend the session time.
Around 5 pm, some sections of the Legislative Yuan’s Power Exercise Act were passed in the third reading, with individuals showing contempt towards the parliament facing a maximum fine of 200,000 New Taiwan Dollars (approximately 6,500 US Dollars); inviting the President to the Legislative Yuan for a state report should be regularized, and the President should respond promptly during oral questioning by lawmakers in sequence.
Additionally, the new provisions on the exercise of hearing rights specify that if individuals attending hearings make false statements, the Legislative Yuan may decide to impose fines ranging from over 20,000 to 200,000 New Taiwan Dollars. The provisions stipulate that there should be no refusal to answer or provide information during cross-examination, and failure to comply would result in fines ranging from over 20,000 to 200,000 New Taiwan Dollars; government officials questioned at the Legislative Yuan could face criminal prosecution for making false statements.
Regarding the parliamentary investigative powers, government agencies, military personnel, legal entities, organizations, or individuals related to society may be requested to provide relevant information; if legal entities, organizations, or individuals violate relevant regulations, the Legislative Yuan may resolve to impose fines of up to 100,000 New Taiwan Dollars.
Outside the Legislative Yuan of the Republic of China, citizens held a protest today. The organizers announced that as of 9:25 pm, the number of protesters on-site had exceeded 70,000. Following the gathering of over 100,000 people outside the Legislative Yuan on the 24th and protests in 9 counties and cities, today saw protests in a total of 15 counties and cities across Taiwan.
Mr. Chen, an elderly veteran from mainland China, watched the “528 Nationwide Blue Bird Action” on the news. Despite his advanced age, he insisted on participating, disregarding the objections of his family. His son angrily asked, “Do you even know what the ‘Blue Bird Action’ is? Why do you want to go?”
After being repeatedly asked by his family, Mr. Chen explained that he had discussed the matter with his grandson and understood the situation: as soon as former President Ma Ying-jeou returned from China, Kuomintang legislators eagerly pushed for the empowerment of the Legislative Yuan, suggesting underlying issues.
Mr. Chen stated that many people participated in the protests because the empowerment bill essentially gave the Legislative Yuan a powerful tool. With the majority of Kuomintang and People First Party lawmakers in the Legislative Yuan, they could control the exercise of executive power while amending laws unfavorable to the Communist Party of China, aligning with the CCP in public opinion, gradually allowing the CCP to control Taiwan, and ultimately achieving “reunification”.
Regarding the empowerment bill, Mr. Chen raised concerns about Taiwan potentially becoming a second Hong Kong, even though some believe it’s an overreaction. Having fought against the Communist Party, he understands their cunning nature, leading him to conclude that the bill could indeed turn Taiwan into a second Hong Kong.
As reported by the Central News Agency, a woman named Ms. Guo, who traveled from the south to the north, stated that the legislative amendment is unconstitutional, and the process is flawed. Even if she is the last one standing, she will stay until the end to make the Legislative Yuan hear the people’s voices. Legislative proposals should reflect public expectations and prioritize livelihoods rather than political ideology-related laws. She expressed concern that such practices might become more common in the Legislative Yuan. She emphasized that the legislature should propose many meaningful laws benefiting the public and the country, and the three parties should unite to come up with beneficial development plans for the country.
A woman named Ms. Yeh mentioned that she had carefully studied the bills under review. One version involved investigating individuals, with criminal consequences for non-attendance, which she considered a significant breach of the constitution. She anticipated significant backlash if such a bill were to pass. She noted that in the past, bills passed would clearly show which members supported or opposed them, but now it’s reduced to just numbers, which she believed is inappropriate.
A man named Mr. Chen pointed out that the bills under review conflicted with the constitution. The provision regarding counter-interrogation lacked a clear definition, and the procedural issues were apparent. There should be thorough discussions rather than preserving the bills for later assembly. This approach of revising the motion to propose an entirely new bill, preventing members from reading it in full, raised procedural concerns.
After the third reading of the Legislative Yuan’s Power Exercise Act, more than ten thousand people gathered for a press conference organized by around 50 civic groups, including the Economic Democracy Union. They collectively rolled a large ball labeled “Citizens Defending Democracy, Restarting Social Dialogue” into the Legislative Yuan to voice the people’s concerns. The organizers announced plans to visit the Executive Yuan, the Legislative Yuan, and the DPP caucus next week.
Today, civic groups held a press conference titled “Parliamentary Abuse of Power Bill Passed Third Reading”. Lai Chung-chiang, the convener of the Economic Democracy Union, stated that this was part of a series of moves by the CCP to control Taiwan’s democracy. In response to the third reading on parliamentary abuse, six major action plans were outlined:
Firstly, civic groups demand the Executive Yuan to propose a reconsideration to allow the Legislative Yuan to review and decide on the bill again. Lai emphasized that seeking a reconsideration was not to escalate the confrontation between the parties but to enable a thorough discussion and full communication after members have carefully examined the bill, filling the gap in the democratic review space previously monopolized by the Blue and White parties.
The reconsideration process will enable Blue and White legislators to listen to society’s feedback and evaluate whether the bill violates the separation of powers, compromises people’s freedom of expression, personal privacy, and trade secrets, or contravenes the boundaries of the parliament’s investigative rights as stipulated by previous judgments of the grand justices.
Secondly, several provisions in the bill raised constitutional concerns, calling for the Executive Yuan and the DPP to engage in constitutional litigation. For example, the provision mandating immediate questioning by lawmakers after the President’s state report flagrantly contradicted constitutional clauses. The power granted to individual legislators under article 25 of the Legislative Yuan’s Power Exercise Act to compel officials or even civilians to provide information clashes with the principle that investigative powers must be exercised collectively by the Legislative Yuan session. They urge the Executive Yuan or DPP caucus to initiate legal proceedings under the constitution to challenge these clearly unconstitutional provisions.
Thirdly, the organizers requested a meeting with the Legislative Yuan President Han Kuo-yu to discuss issues related to procedural justice and transparency in parliament.
Fourthly, focusing on civic action, they will push for “Grassroots Democratic Dialogue,” urging civic groups across the country to hold community meetings in Kuomintang lawmakers’ electoral districts to uncover all facets of the parliamentary abuse bill and its impact on the separation of powers and Taiwan’s democracy. They’ll produce training materials, shortcuts, and seed instructor training to help the public understand the truth behind the bills and exert pressure on district legislators during the reconsideration vote. Lai called on lawmakers abusing power to heed the warning of the public.
Fifthly, the Taiwan Civil Front will advance social dialogue in New Taipei City, forming a local task force joined by local youth organizations, civic groups, and indigenous small parties to launch the “Anti-Parliamentary Abuse of Power: New Taipei Navigation—Social Dialogue Action” in Kuomintang lawmakers’ electoral areas. New Taipei City, being the country’s largest city, will be a focal point for this movement.
Lastly, the organizers urged nationwide unity urging active participation to expose the truth behind the parliamentary abuse bill. The Taiwan Civil Front will provide information and materials and collaborate with local civic groups in New Taipei City to defend democracy and human rights collectively.
The Control Yuan of the Republic of China issued a press release in the evening, stating that while they support parliamentary reform to strengthen parliamentary self-regulation, it should align with public expectations. However, some sections of the Legislative Yuan’s Power Exercise Act that were passed did not adhere to the framework set out by the constitution and prior interpretations by the grand justices, indicating a breach of the separation of powers.
The Control Yuan pointed out that the current government operates on a five-power constitutional system, distinct from the separation of powers seen in other countries with three branches. While respecting the direction of a potential shift towards a three-power system in the future, the current structure should adhere to the five-power system until a constitutional amendment takes place. Additionally, the investigative powers of the Legislative Yuan, unlike the parliamentary investigative powers under a three-branch system overseas, differ. The Control Yuan, despite not being a popular body, retains powers such as impeachment, reporting, correction, and investigation as dictated by the constitution to safeguard the independence of the prosecutorial system and administrative bodies.
The Control Yuan emphasized that the exercise of the Legislative Yuan’s investigative powers should be supplemental, focused on gathering information necessary for performing duties, appropriately restricted, and distinct from the exercise of administrative or criminal responsibilities. The processes of the legislative, judicial, and control Yuan investigations should not impede or undermine each other, creating confusion for government agencies and officials, thereby impacting the operation of the five-power constitutional system.
Upon examining the recently passed Legislative Yuan’s Power Exercise Act, the Control Yuan stated that some sections encroached on the core functions of oversight, violating the separation of powers. The Control Yuan expressed its inability to accept this and urged all parties to approach the matter carefully and seriously. The Control Yuan reiterated the importance of respecting the constitutional framework and highlighted the significance of effective exercise of oversight powers during the tenure of the current supervisory commissioners in upholding the values of the separation of powers and equality as enshrined in the constitution.
The Control Yuan stressed that all five Yuans being constitutional institutions should mutually respect each other, in line with constitutional precedents. Any exercise of the constitutional institutions should operate within the framework set out by the constitution and interpretations by the grand justices, aligning with the democratic rule of law expected by the public.