KMT Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling's Constitutional Breaking Plots and Taiwan's Constitutional Crisis HoonTing

KMT Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling's Constitutional Breaking Plots and Taiwan's Constitutional Crisis    HoonTing

KMT’s legislator Weng Hsiao-ling's actions to undermine the constitution began when she took office in early February 2024. During the general interpellation of Premier Chen Chien-jen, she declared, "I am just powerful than you" and "Interpellation is from superior to subordinate." In June, during a committee meeting, she shouted, "I am just superior to you all! So what? You just lack knowledge!" The latter reflects a personal character issue, but the former exposes her erroneous understanding of the constitutional system: the belief that the legislative branch is institutionally superior to the executive branch. This assertion became the justification for her subsequent series of constitutional violations, with everything starting from this point.

However, her viewpoint is incorrect. Although Weng Hsiao-ling holds a PhD of Munich University, her education has not enhanced the depth of her thinking. In theory, social contract theory describes the formation of the state: the people first establish the legislative power, then delegate it to the executive power, while the judicial power serves as a neutral third party, acting as an arbiter and the final barrier for human rights protection. The sequence of the three powers is merely a necessity in theoretical description, not a distinction of superiority or inferiority.

In reality, modern republican states did not emerge from nothing but evolved from thousands of years of various state forms. In these ancient states, the three powers were often intermixed, for example, a chief executive not only held administrative authority but also possessed partial legislative and judicial powers. Social contract theory is merely a framework for institutional analysis and redesign of the state entity, allowing governing powers to enter a new era. Under this framework, the various power branches have no precedence or hierarchy. Weng Hsiao-ling's misunderstanding, coupled with her deliberate emulation of Poland's political struggles, is precisely the root of the problem.

The Blue-White Camp's Assault on the Constitution

Under the reckless assaults from the Blue-White camp (Kuomintang and Taiwan People's Party), Taiwan's constitution has exposed design vulnerabilities, but as of today, it has not yet reached the point where a new constitution or further amendments are necessary. The constitution already includes several mechanisms to resolve conflicts in the separation of powers, such as:

• Constitutional Court: As an arbitration body for disputes, it has currently been sidelined by Weng Hsiao-ling using Poland as a precedent, rendering it inoperable.
• President's inter-branch mediation power: This has been rejected by the Legislative Yuan President.
• Reconsideration power: Operated by the legislature in accordance with constitutional provisions into a meaningless loop.
• Countersignature power: Currently the focal point.
• No-confidence vote and congressional dissolution power: The Blue-White camp has indicated unwillingness to initiate a no-confidence vote, thereby preventing the president from exercising the power to dissolve Congress.

The Blue-White camp treats the constitution as a tool for personal revenge or a "pledge of allegiance" for a minority's political shift, unwilling to implement the next constitutional resolution mechanism (dissolution of Congress and re-election after a no-confidence vote), preferring to let the country head toward collapse through inaction. This is not only a constitutional crisis but also an abandonment of responsibility to the nation and the duty to protect the people.

The History and Legal Basis of the ROC Constitution

The Republic of China (ROC) Constitution was already abandoned by Chinese citizens in 1949 through the declaration of provisional constitution, the "Common Program of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference," and was formally replaced and extinguished in 1954 with the enactment of the first version of the People's Republic of China (PRC) Constitution.

This extinct constitution, relying on the authority delegated by the post-war proxy military occupation by the Allies, continues to exist substantively in Taiwan as an "occupation basic law." Due to this origin, the Taiwanese governing authority and people have no right and authority to draft a new constitution for the status is yet to be determined. Past multiple amendments were neither constitution-making nor true amendments but took the form of "additional articles," without altering the original constitutional text, merely appending them at the end.

This reflects the special historical positioning of the constitution: originating from post-war proxy military occupation and the San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT). What the Blue-White-Red camps most fear to reveal and distort are precisely these historical documents and legal principles.

Current Constitutional Deadlock and Future Directions

Today, President Lai Ching-te's invitation for a national affairs tea meeting (implementation of the inter-branch coordination power in the constitution) has been rejected by the Legislative Yuan President Han Guo-yu on the excuse that "Congress is a collegial system." In the absence of judicial arbitration, the executive branch's last resort can only be to refuse countersignature or non-execution of relevant bills. This constitutional deadlock has not yet reached its end, with the ball still in Congress's court. However, the Blue-White camp uses the harshest language to label Lai Ching-te a dictator, an accusation that is not only contradictory but also exposes their political manipulation.

Taiwan's political deadlock is no longer limited to paralyzing the Constitutional Court but also includes formulating or revising of existing policies and laws such as:

• Expansion of congressional powers.
• Requiring the central government to illegally borrow money to meet local subsidies.
• Requiring live broadcasts of trials under the Court Organization Act.
• Allowing Kinmen and other outlying islands to introduce Chinese capital without central review.
• Cutting the Control Yuan's budget by 96% to render it inoperable.
• Incorporating public-funded assistant budgets into legislators' income.
• Restoring generous retirement benefits for public servants, teachers, police, etc.
• The general budget bill still not being referred to committee by the end of December, etc.

These have surpassed the scope of Taiwan’s "autonomy" and evolved into a "new type of warfare" primarily involving infiltration, subversion, and cognitive warfare, with military aspects as a smokescreen. Taiwan's status is being unilaterally altered. In contrast to the increasingly urgent military pressure and expansion from the CCP, at this time, the Taiwanese government should emphasize key concepts such as "occupation basic law" to remind the US and Japan: based on the SFPT authorization, they have the treaty obligation to defend Taiwan's status from "unilateral changes." Requesting US intervention is absolutely legitimate; otherwise, KMT’s politicians in Taiwan aligned with the CCP's stance will mislead it as an internal autonomy matter, preventing US and Japanese intervention, ultimately leaving only the CCP able to intervene. Now, only by facing these occupation legal principles squarely can the crisis be resolved and national collapse avoided.