Taiwan’s Dilemma of Procedural Justice

In May, Taiwan’s opposition-controlled parliament passed a controversial reform bill, prompting thousands of people to take to the streets in protest. Demonstrators expressed their anger at the opposition parties for rushing the bill through the legislature without following proper procedures. Still, the protesters’ efforts seemed in vain. On June 12, the Procedural Committee of the Legislative Yuan, which oversees parliamentary proceedings, once again violated review regulations to block specific bills.

Procedural Committee Exceeds Authority by Conducting Substantive Reviews

Cases of foreign malign actors infiltrating into parliaments have been reported worldwide in democratic countries. Both the UK and Germany have reported espionage scandals, and in Taiwan, three legislative assistants were convicted for their involvement in espionage cases during the previous session of the Legislative Yuan.

To strengthen the security the Legislative Yuan, on June 12, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) requested to add a discussion on a proposed amendments of the “Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area,” which requires legislators to report their visits to China. But the request was “temporarily shelved” by Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who together form a majority in the Procedural Committee. The legislation has been unlawfully blocked in the Procedural Committee for the sixth time by the two opposition parties.

The opposition parties’ unilateral action to shelve the discussion not only violates the spirit of democratic deliberation but also disregards the rule of law. According to Article 4 of the Organizational Rules of the Legislative Yuan Procedural Committee, the committee is authorized only to conduct “formal review,” meaning it should verify whether the proposal procedures are complete — such as ensuring that a legislative proposal has the required 15 co-sponsors — and whether the content of a legislation falls within the Legislative Yuan’s jurisdiction.

Yet in this case, the Procedural Committee conducted “substantive reviews,” blocking the proposal from moving forward to the next stage of discussion and becoming an official record of the Legislative Yuan for public scrutiny.

Regardless of whether the opposition supports the China visit registration system, Taiwan, as a democratic nation, should provide ample opportunity to discuss the legislation. The proposal has the right to be passed in its first reading by the Procedural Committee and then proceed to the designated committee for more substantial discussion. As a democratic nation, Taiwan should and will also respect the majority’s decision.

Deepening Democracy Within the Legislative Yuan to Counter Authoritarianism

The rule of law is the cornerstone of democracy. Faced with China’s authoritarian expansion worldwide, Taiwan and international civic groups have called for countering infiltration and influence through strengthening democracy. Taiwan has also successfully deepened our democracy through openness and transparency to counter authoritarianism. The first step was to strengthen procedural justice in the Legislative Yuan.

In reality, bills have frequently been blocked by the Procedural Committee. During the 7th Legislative Yuan term from 2008 to 2012, nearly six thousand proposals from legislators were blocked by the Kuomintang caucus in the Procedural Committee. To enhance procedural justice in the Legislative Yuan, civil society groups have advocated for the Procedural Committee to be the first to live broadcast its meeting. The Committee began live broadcasting since 2012, while other parliamentary committees followed suit. By enhancing transparency and public accountability, in the 9th and 10th Legislative Yuan terms, almost no political party illegally blocked items in the Procedural Committee’s reports, demonstrating Taiwan’s successful democratic consolidation through promoting openness, transparency, and procedural fairness.

However, since the new parliament convened earlier this year, the opposition parties have revived the past practice of abusing power under the guise of “parliamentary reform” in the Procedural Committee. This has led to a regression of Taiwan’s parliamentary democracy by sixteen years. Their actions not only blocked bills that could strengthen Taiwan’s national security but also eroded the spirit of democratic discourse and infringed upon legislators’ rights to propose bills. This has allowed authoritarian influences to spread within Taiwan’s halls of democracy.

Taiwan’s civil society has previously succeeded in enhancing democracy through openness and transparency, garneringSupported by both ruling and opposition parties for initiatives like the “Open Parliament.” Now facing the expanding authoritarianism ideology in Taiwan’s parliament, the challenge lies in how to once again elevate Taiwan’s democracy through openness and transparency.

(Photo by Legislative Yuan)