Opposition Pushes Through Amendments to Limit Constitutional Court’s Adjudication Power
On Friday, Taiwan’s opposition lawmakers successfully pushed through amendments to raise the threshold for adjudication by the Constitutional Court, including a new provision that requires a minimum of 10 justices to hear a case. This move, which has sparked considerable debate, was adopted during a tense legislative session led by the main opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and supported by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP).
The amendments, which are seen as a challenge to the current judicial system, were partly based on a proposal by KMT Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling at the end of September. These revisions, which were only finalized on the floor of the Legislature on Friday, seek to change the way constitutional rulings are made in Taiwan.
Key Changes in the Constitutional Court’s Ruling Process
The most notable revision is the introduction of a minimum quorum of 10 justices required to adjudicate a case in the Constitutional Court. Currently, there is no such stipulation, and a case is typically presided over by a two-thirds majority of the sitting justices. This move is viewed as an attempt to make it more difficult for the court to deliver decisions, particularly on issues related to controversial legislation.
Additionally, the amendments propose that any ruling declaring existing laws unconstitutional would require the backing of at least nine justices, instead of a simple majority vote. This provision aims to ensure that decisions with significant legal ramifications are more thoroughly supported within the court.
Concerns Over Court’s Capacity Amid Judicial Vacancies
The Constitutional Court, which normally has 15 justices, is currently operating with just eight members due to the expiration of terms for seven justices at the end of October. Although President Lai Ching-te has nominated replacements for these justices, their confirmation hearings were delayed by KMT and TPP lawmakers, who argued that the nominations were overly partisan.
A vote on the nominees is scheduled for December 24, 2023. If fewer than two of the nominees are approved, the amendments passed on Friday will effectively render the court unable to make rulings until new justices are appointed. The current situation has left the court with its lowest number of justices since the introduction of judicial interpretation in 1947.
Proposed Reforms Trigger Protests and Criticism
The opposition-led amendments have sparked a strong backlash from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which views the changes as a direct attempt to undermine the court’s ability to rule on key constitutional issues. Civil society groups have also voiced their concerns, with protests erupting outside the Legislative Yuan as the session dragged on late into the evening.
Wu Szu-yao, secretary-general of the DPP legislative caucus, accused the opposition of “retaliation” against recent Constitutional Court rulings that limited the death penalty and struck down KMT-endorsed legislative measures. Critics argue that the amendments are part of a broader effort to paralyze the court and diminish its influence over controversial rulings.
New Requirement for Filling Judicial Vacancies
Another significant change passed on Friday mandates that the president must nominate replacements for any justices who retire, resign, or pass away, within two months. This provision is intended to ensure that the Constitutional Court has a full complement of justices at all times, preventing prolonged judicial vacancies from stalling the court’s work.
Protests Continue as Legislative Session Extends Late Into the Night
As the legislative session continued late into the night, protests outside the Legislative Yuan persisted, with organizers vowing to stay until the end of the session. The KMT and TPP used their majority to extend the session until midnight, allowing them to push the amendments through despite strong opposition from the DPP and civil society.
Table: Key Amendments to the Constitutional Court’s Ruling Process
| Amendment | Description |
|---|---|
| Quorum for Rulings | A minimum of 10 justices required to hear a case, up from the previous practice of two-thirds majority. |
| Ruling on Unconstitutional Laws | Any ruling declaring laws unconstitutional must be backed by at least 9 justices. |
| Judicial Vacancies | The president must nominate replacements for justices who retire, resign, or pass away within two months. |
| Current Number of Justices | The Constitutional Court currently has only 8 justices after 7 terms expired on October 31, 2023. |
FAQs:
Q1: Why are these amendments controversial?
A: The amendments raise the threshold for the Constitutional Court to adjudicate cases, making it more difficult for the court to make rulings. Critics, particularly from the ruling DPP, argue that this move is an attempt to weaken the court’s influence and hinder its ability to rule on key constitutional matters.
Q2: How many justices are currently on the Constitutional Court?
A: The Constitutional Court currently has only eight justices, following the expiration of seven justices’ terms at the end of October 2023. Normally, the court has 15 justices.
Q3: When is the vote on the new nominees for the court?
A: The vote on President Lai’s nominations for the new justices is scheduled for December 24, 2023. If fewer than two nominees are approved, the court will be left without the required number of justices to adjudicate cases.
Q4: What impact will these amendments have on the court’s future rulings?
A: The amendments are expected to make it more difficult for the Constitutional Court to rule on cases, especially controversial ones, due to the higher quorum and the requirement for more justices to support a ruling.
Q5: How have civil society groups responded to these amendments?
A: Civil society groups have expressed strong opposition to the amendments, arguing that they are part of a broader political effort to undermine the Constitutional Court’s independence and its ability to rule on constitutional issues.
