Taiwan Today

It was a first-time event: politicians, scholars, and other informed citizens met in a National Affairs Conference (NAC) to debate the agenda of political reforms that should be pursued by the Republic of China on Taiwan. Foremost among the issues discussed by the 150 participants was whether the ROC president should be elected by direct election or by an electoral college. Questions about constitutional reform and the best course to take in formulating Taiwan's changing policies toward the mainland also dominated the meetings, which lasted from June 28 to July 4, 1990.

The unprecedented conference was a product of discussions President Lee Teng-hui had on the evening of March 21 with fifty-three student representatives. The students had been delegated by fellow demonstrators who were at the time in their seventh day of occupying the CKS Memorial Hall square. The large-scale demonstration, which drew a large segment of society in addition to the students, was in response to actions taken by the members of National Assembly then in session to elect the president.

The elderly parliamentarians, who make up 88 percent of the National Assembly, took the meeting (held every six years), as an opportunity to double their pay, wrest more political power, and extend their terms in office indefinitely. The actions of the Assembly members not only demonstrated that they were out of touch with the political reform realities set in motion by the late President Chiang Ching-kuo, they also caused massive negative reaction from all segments of society. People demand­ed that the assemblymen's four-decade tenure without facing re-elections be terminated at soon as possible. The demonstrations in the Memorial square were but one aspect of this widespread call for change.

Although President Lee Teng-hui invited representatives from across the social and political spectrum to attend the NAC, several liberal scholars and political dissidents pulled out of the meeting. They complained that the representation of various groups in the con­ference was not adequate and claimed that they did not wish to attend and thereby appear to be pawns in a game controlled by the ruling Kuomintang (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (D PP), the main opposition party.

When President Lee opened the NAC on June 28, he promised to implement the conclusions reached by the conference by appropriate legal means. The president asked the participants in the conference to channel their energies toward political reform. In line with this orientation, the conference divided its deliberations into five general topics: parliamentary reform, assessment of local government and central government systems, revision of the Constitution, and relations with mainland China.

The first day of discussions dealt with parliamentary reforms, and unanimous agreement was reached on the senior parliamentarians who have dominated politics since their election in 1947: These long-serving individuals, who have never had to face re-election, should retire as soon as possible.

In fact, the issue of parliamentary reform was virtually settled by a decision by the Council of Grand Justices one week before the conference convened, making the discussions by NAC partici­pants less meaningful. The justices ruled that all the elderly members of the three central representative organs—the National Assembly (the nation's electoral college and the highest constitution­ amending body), the Legislative Yuan (parliament), and the Control Yuan (the nation's highest supervisory body)­—must retire by December 31, 1991.

The senior parliamentarians, most of whom are over seventy years old, make up a majority in each of the three government organs. Because holding elections was impossible in mainland China after 1949, they have been allowed to serve indefinitely through constitutional interpretations made by the Council of Grand Justices in the early 1950s.

In spite of unanimous agreement on the necessity for retirement, the NAC participants disagreed on the date. The majority of the participants (mostly from the KMT) said that they should all retire by the end of 1991, in accordance with the constitutional ruling by the Grand Justices. But other participants (mostly from the DPP) said that their retirement should be completed by the end of 1990, since there was no reason to delay the action. Some scholars proposed a compromise, saying that the deadline for the retirement should be July 1991.

The first day of discussions included related issues about the appropriate manner of representing the populace in the various political bodies. None of the participants supported a proposed "mainland representation system," where people would be elected to represent certain provinces and areas not currently under the control of the ROC government. Instead, the majority of the participants agreed with the installation of "national representatives" (without specifying constituencies) who would be apportioned to the various political parties ac­cording to the number of votes they receive in parliamentary elections.

In a related topic, none of the NAC participants wanted to maintain the current quota system for electing representatives of professional and women's groups currently followed in parliamentary elections. As for the overseas Chinese representation system, some participants suggested abolishing the system altogether. No conclusions were reached in this area.

On the second day of the NAC, group discussions focused on local and central government systems. The overwhelming majority of the participants agreed that the Taiwan governor and the Taipei and Kaohsiung mayors should be directly elected. But there was a divergence of opinions on how to avoid having an elected governor with more popular rep­resentation than either the ROC president or premier, if they were also to be popularly elected.

Four general suggestions were raised regarding the future of Taiwan Province: (1) increase the number of special municipalities; (2) divide Taiwan into several provinces; (3) create a phantom provincial government, or (4) maintain the status quo with constitutional rights restored to the provincial and local governments. Although there was no consensus on anyone proposal, most participants supported either the first or second of these possibilities.

Increasing the number of special municipalities was the most popular measure. KMT legislator Jaw Shau­-kong, for example, argued that the establishment of more municipalities, such as Taipei and Kaohsiung, could reduce the population of Taiwan Province to three or four million, eliminating the concern about a governor receiving more popular votes than the president or premier. Some participants suggested that Taiwan could instead be divided into several provinces. The most common number heard was six, following an elimination or redesignation of counties.

Less popular was a proposal to turn the provincial government into a nominal entity, rendering it powerless until the time of unification with the mainland. Under the scheme, county and city governments would become more powerful and be primarily responsible for handling local problems. According to Taipei County Commissioner You Ching, however, such a restructuring would further aggravate problems such as transportation, environmental protec­tion, and the distribution of natural resources that go across local government boundaries. Still other participants advocated giving Taiwan Province greater powers under the existing constitution in order to ensure a more balanced development of the entire island.

NAC participants also addressed issues related to local and central government systems. Most of them agreed that the current system of government and elections at the local level is no longer appropriate. The overwhelming majority of participants called for abolishment of the bottom tier of the government system. They complained about the corrup­tion, violence, and cost of elections in both townships and li-chang (the head of a sub-district consisting of several neighborhoods), saying that the way democracy was practiced in such grassroots elections was actually fracturing communities. Some participants called for a reduc­tion of the four-tier system of govern­ment to three tiers: central, provincial and county or city. Others said direct election of the governor and a return to constitutional rule could allow for the appointment of township mayors.

The NAC participants discussed the ROC Constitution on the third day of their discussions, and almost everyone agreed that it should be changed. But no consensus was reached on whether the Constitution should be amended or redrafted, or on what changes should be implemented. During debate on the issues, fifty-seven people voiced support for amending the Constitution and thirty-two called for a new one. Of the latter, twenty-one supported the idea of redrafting the Constitution based upon two draft versions suggested by the DPP: the "Great Charter for Democracy" or the "Republic of Taiwan New Constitution." Eleven others called for an "ROC Basic Law" or "Taiwan Basic Law" as had been recommended by non-partisan politicians.

KMT and DPP participants entered into heated debate on this issue. According to Ma Ying-jeou, chairman of the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission of the Executive Yuan, the DPP's Great Charter for Democracy would actually provide for a strongman president more powerful than that under the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion. But DPP legislator Frank Hsieh argued that while he opposed a strongman who is not elected by the people, he would not oppose a strongman popularly elected under constitutional rule.

Ma called for revision of constitu­tional articles by a newly elected National Assembly in 1992, but Hsieh said that such a proposal was contradictory. According to a promise made by President Lee, Hsieh pointed out, the Temporary Provisions were to be lifted within one year. Therefore, waiting until after the 1992 elections to revise the Constitution to suit Taiwan's new condition would in effect push back that deadline. In the dis­cussions there was general agreement that any changes in the Constitution should not be determined by the current National Assembly because it was still dominated by senior mainland Chinese representatives.

The NAC reopened on July 2 after a Sunday recess. The fourth day of discussions focused on the structure of the central political system. But a controversial issue emerged. Some participants said that the KMT and DPP already had reached an agreement on the popular election of the ROC President. According to Cheng Hsin-hsiung, deputy secretary-general of the KMT Central Committee, the agreement was concluded outside the conference by NAC participants from the two parties. But KMT Secretary-General James Soong said this was only Cheng's personal opinion. Cheng's announcement caused heated debate in the NAC on the question of whether popular election of the president should be listed as one of the NAC's recommendations.

Because the KMT was the host of the conference, it was under strong political pressure to prevent any partici­pants from withdrawing from the NAC meetings. As a result, the KMT entered into a period of negotiations because of demands made by the so-called Opposi­tion Alliance. On July 1, the Alliance, which was made up of some twenty DPP members, independents, liberals, and overseas dissidents, proposed four con­ditions for the KMT to meet during the conference. The Alliance members indicated that they would withdraw from the NAC if these conditions were not satisfied.

The four conditions were (1) the popular election of the president; (2) a restructuring of the parliament by making it a single-chamber, retiring senior assembly members by the end of 1990, and re-electing parliamentary members; (3) popular election of the provincial governor and Taipei and Kaohsiung mayors; and (4) putting the results of the NAC to a national referendum.

Although KMT Secretary-General James Soong argued that the negotiations should not be regarded as "negotiations between two parties" but only as an exchange of opinions, many scholars who participated in the NAC were unhappy with the situation. "Since the KMT and the DPP have already reached an agreement, why do they need professional opinions from scholars and other experts?" asked Professor Yao Li-ming of National Sun Yat-sen University. According to Lu Ya-li, a professor at National Taiwan University, the negotia­tions gave the impression that the two parties were fighting for political benefits.

Prior to the conference, KMT officials had reiterated that the NAC would not turn out to be a time of negotiations between the two major political parties. But circumstances evidently forced an adjustment of that pledge. Clearly, however, there was no consensus on the re­sults of the negotiations between two parties inside and outside the NAC. It seems that the only goal was for the KMT to find a way to keep all NAC participants at the conference.

On July 3, the fifth day of discussions the NAC reached another peak as government and non-government participants finally reached agreement on the presidential election amid some faint protest by liberal scholars. The agreement was announced by Wu Feng-shan (an independent), who was elected di­scussion chairman at the NAC's third full meeting. He said that "the president shall be popularly elected, and the rules of the election and the procedures of its implementation shall be enacted through consultations among all concerned following legal procedures."

The NAC closed on July 4 with participants divided on most major issues, especially the central government sys­tem and constitutional reform. The final reports prepared by five panels were read before the closing ceremony in the afternoon. President Lee Teng-hui pledged to put the conclusions of the NAC into action, but he cautioned that reform must not endanger national security.

Highlights from the summary report:

•Concerning the central government system, the majority of NAC participants agreed that the existing presidential elections should be improved by allowing the participation of all citizens in the process. But general agreement disintegrated when the discussion turned to concrete methods. Some participants insisted that the president should be elected by popular vote, while others favored the establishment of an electoral college. As for the relationship among the president, the legislature, and the cabinet, some participants pointed out that a cabinet parliamentarian system seemed to best suit the nation's needs. Others favored a presidential system, and still others thought a combination of the two systems was the best solution.

•On parliamentary reform, the NAC participants offered ten conclusions on the subject, foremost among them a demand that all senior parliamentarians retire within a certain period and that the status and functions of the National Assembly and the Control Yuan also be changed. Although most of the participants believed that an overall re-election of central parliamentarians should be held by the end of 1991, they did not reach a consensus on the form the parliament should take, that is, whether it should have three branches as it does currently, or if it should become a unicameral body.

•On constitutional revision, the participants reached a consensus, urging the end of the Period of Mobilization for the Suppression of Communist Rebellion and the abolishment of the Temporary Provisions. They also recommended that an organization endowed with a popular basis should revise the Constitution. More than 70 percent of the partici­pants favored reform by amending the present Constitution. In their opinion, the constitutional revision should be made by amending its provisions or by adding a fifteenth chapter to the existing Constitution.

•On the issue of local self­-government, the participants agreed that local government systems must meet the stipulations of the Constitution. Therefore, provincial, county, and town governments should be given more· power to run their own affairs. They added that administrative districts of local governments should be adjusted, but that the method for doing so deserves further deliberations. Some participants suggested that Taiwan be divided into several provinces, and others preferred the status quo with an increase of municipalities under the direct jurisdiction of the central government. The only consensus reached in this area was that all local government chiefs and council members should be elected by popular vote.

•On mainland policy and relations across the Taiwan Straits, the overwhelming majority of NAC participants agreed that Taiwan's security should be the prime consideration when promoting relations with mainland China. They said that such relations must be based on the principles of safety, reciprocity, equality, and pragmatism. Most participants expressed the view that the governments on the two sides of the Straits were equal in the sense that they represented different political entities that rule the Taiwan area and mainland China.

One week after the NAC concluded, President Lee, acting in his capacity as KMT chair­man, instructed the ruling party to set up a constitutional reform planning group in order to carry out the recommendations made by the conference. But the diverse opinions expressed during and after the conference have put the president in a political dilemma. Should he carry out non-binding NAC results by setting up a constitutional reform planning group, or should he let the existing institutions—the National Assembly and Legislative Yuan—revise the Constitution?

According to the Constitution, the legal constitution-amending institutions are the National Assembly and Legislative Yuan, with the former having more power to amend the Constitution. Under the shadow of a unicameral congress called for in the NAC deliberation, it remains to be seen how the National Assembly will respond to the call for amending the Constitution. Moreover, a constitutional reform planning group can at best help form a consensus within the KMT itself. It cannot carry out the NAC's recommendations, especially since the NAC participants failed to come up with a consensus on most issues. Most of the topics discussed during the conference would more or less require constitutional reform, but it is still an open question whether the revision of the Constitution should be made through a due process of amendment through the constitution-amending institutions.

Prior to any constitutional revision, the most important political issue to be solved is whether a two-house parliament or a unicameral congress best suits the nation's needs. Most scholars appear to favor a two-house parliament because it can provide additional checks and bal­ances to the political system. Such a check-and-balance mechanism is particularly indispensable because the independence of the ROC's judicial branch is still in question, the freedom of the press is not yet as certain as it is in the U.S. and the U.K., and the party system has not yet fully matured.

Likewise, in the absence of a sufficient mechanism of checks and balances, the presidential system proposed in the NAC deserves careful second thought. The concern, if not fear, with regard to a presidential system for the ROC is that—with the exception of the U.S.—most countries with such a system have eventually become dictatorships. The presidential system has been institutionalized and practiced successfully for over two hundred years in the U.S. largely because power is balanced among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The federal system, the independence of the judicial branch, the two-party system, and the freedom of the press provide additional checks and balances to keep the U.S. president from usurping power. But in the ROC, it is rather easy for the head of the ruling party to become both the president and a strongman, putting both the executive branch and the party under the control of one person who is not subject to an appropriate mechanism of checks and balances.

True, the NAC concluded without much consensus on most issues. And since the participants were not elected by the people, the recommendations proposed in the conference can at most be treated as part of the reference materials used by the existing constitution amending institutions, the National Assembly and Legislative Yuan. So, was the NAC worth the more than US$1 million the government spent on the week-­long conference?

The answer must be affirmative for at least two reasons. First, the NAC provided a systemic series of discussions that were in effect a democratic education for the people of the nation. The unprecedented detailed reportage given to the NAC by the print and TV media before, during, and after the conference has already contributed to the cultivation of a more refined civic culture.

Second, the NAC participants came from different political camps, ranging from the KMT to the DPP to various independents, and from serving government officials to overseas dissidents who were sought for prosecution by judicial authorities only a few months ago. The intense, primarily rational, communication in the NAC will help the ROC to evolve a "dissenting political culture," where the ruling party tolerates the oppo­sition parties and the opposition parties respect the ruling party. The establishment of such a sophisticated political environment will in turn contribute to the healthy development of the nation's multiparty system.