Taiwanese citizens have taken the initiative to oppose parliamentary abuse of power through street speeches. On June 13th, Yu Dongxu, a prospective graduate student from National Taiwan University, explained outside Xizhi Train Station in New Taipei City. Some questioned why the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) supported these measures when in opposition but opposed them after coming into power. Others argued that packaging parliament authority expansion as parliamentary reform is a deceptive tactic.
The amendment to parliamentary powers has sparked public attention, with not only political parties holding explanatory meetings but also civil groups independently taking to the streets to make their voices heard. The founder of the Facebook fan page “Seven Star Burning Eyebrow Legislator Observatory” and prospective graduate student in social studies at National Taiwan University, Yu Dongxu, set up a small chair, a small amplification device, and homemade signboards outside Xizhi Train Station at 6 pm on June 13th to explain the controversial amendment, its latest progress, the significance of the Executive Yuan’s veto, and other remedies to the public.
Taiwanese passersby stopped curiously or watched while waiting for buses, with up to about 10 people gathering at times.
Yu Dongxu, who grew up in Xizhi, New Taipei City, told a Central News Agency reporter that he always wanted to help people understand politics in the simplest way possible. By directly speaking out on the streets, he believed he could break through the echo chambers online. Even though not everyone had to agree with his views, he hoped that people could form their own opinions after listening, which embodies the spirit of democracy.
Yu Dongxu mentioned that he initially thought he would be speaking to thin air and was pleased that some people were willing to stop and listen in the scorching weather.
At the end of his speech, some people asked what the public could do next, while others questioned the DPP’s shift from supporting to opposing the measures once in power, calling it a regrettable move before leaving.
Another individual countered that while parliamentary reform is necessary, expanding parliamentary powers is a mistake, stating, “Packaging parliamentary authority expansion as parliamentary reform is like sugar-coating poison.”
In response, Yu Dongxu acknowledged the need for parliamentary reform but emphasized that it should be done through proper channels, following due process and democratic principles. Besides the Executive Yuan’s veto and seeking constitutional interpretation through the Grand Justices, people could continue monitoring the behavior of legislators. The pressure from the public’s attention would keep legislators in check.
A legal professional present at the scene, Miss Chen, told the Central News Agency, “I do not oppose parliamentary reform; I am against expanding parliamentary powers.” She believed that everyone would have their own perspective, and the public elected legislators to engage in constructive debates. However, she expressed disappointment in many legislators who failed to facilitate discussions and even made basic errors in legal texts.
Miss Chen expressed her disillusionment with the majority of legislators in parliament, stating that legislators should oversee the government and enact laws beneficial to the people, rather than seeking to expand their powers to investigate and punish citizens.
She mentioned that she had voted for Ma Ying-jeou in the past and participated in the Blue Bird Action this time. She found it perplexing that opposing views are automatically associated with the Green Camp. She emphasized that legislators should not prioritize party interests but rather serve the people’s interests.
(Translated from Central News Agency)