Liu Jincai
On the eve of Taiwan Cai Yingwen's oath of employment, the DPP legislator proposed the draft amendments to the Cross -Strait People's Relations Regulations in the DPP legislature.Unified the previous text to replace it in response to national development.Among them, the Cross -Strait Regulations have been read on the Payment Committee of the Legislative Yuan, and the constitutional amendments are included in the Legislative Yuan report on May 15th to enter the first reading procedure.However, at the end of the critical juncture, the proposal's cliff Lema took the initiative to withdraw two proposals, avoiding a constitutional crisis in Taiwan and the limited conflict between the two sides of the strait.
From the actions of the proposal with the active withdrawal of the case to analyze its political meaning, or it can be judged that the DPP has recognized that this dangerous measure that touches the bottom line of Taiwan's Taiwan policy not only violates its repeated promise of maintaining the status quo, new new statement, new new promise, new new promise, new new promise, new new statement, new new promise, new new procurement, new promise, new new promise, new new procurement, new promise, new new statement, new new statement, new new claims, new promises, new new claims to maintain the status quo.Four principles (promises are unchanged, goodwill, uncomfortable, and unauthorized); also means that once the mainland authorities regard this as a revision of the law of legal Taiwan independence, it will be awarded to start the anti -split state of the country.EssenceIn other words, the Cai Yingwen government has realized that in the draft amendments to the Cross -Strait Regulations and the Constitutional Refining Article Amendment, if the country's needs before the country's unity should be deleted, it may constitute a commitment to maintain the status quo.Such a provocative political behavior will have a significant and immediately danger of security in Taiwan.
First of all, this legislator proposal involves the constitutional crisis and unconstitutional debate.In the draft amendment of the Cross -Strait Regulations, the first state of the first state of the country was changed to the development of the state;EssenceThe amendment of the Cross -Strait Regulations is to cooperate with the Constitution's additional amendments to correct the need to delete the needs of the country before the country's unity.However, the amendments to the Constitution's additional amendment have not yet been started, but the legal amendments to the Cross -Strait Regulations at the Legal level.If the level of the constitution cannot be revised in the future, the legal level has been modified first, and there may be controversy.
In addition, in the legal and constitutional level, the national jurisdiction of the Republic of China is limited to Taiwan Pengjinma and its affiliated islands.And territory and field.This separation of sovereignty and physical governance will deepen the doubts of the mainland authorities on the pursuit of independence of law on the pursuit of legal independence in Taiwan.
Secondly, the removal of political actions before the unity of the country, flowing in strategic thinking, rather than focusing on long -term constitutional transformation projects.At present, the Cross -Strait Regulations have only completed one reading. This is the Temporary Performance of the DPP before Tsai Ing -wen in his job to appease supporters and basic teachings.This amendment is only to play counterfeit balls to achieve the effect of political soothing, and solve the political sequelae of the target of voting to greatly votes to absorb radical votes.With more than half of the Democratic Progressive Party in the Legislative Yuan, it is not difficult to complete the unification of countries in the regulations on Cross -Strait; but it is necessary to reach the high threshold of constitutional amendments, unless the pan -blue cooperation, it is impossible to complete the constitutional amendment at all.
In the end, if the Cross -Strait Regulations are completed, the law is completed, but it cannot be amended in the constitution, which may be unconstitutional.In this way, the Pan -Blue Political Alliance will inevitably propose to interpret the Constitution of the Grand Justice Meeting of the Justice of the Court of Justice; the Conference on the Great Judge must face the dual dilemma derived from this highly sensitive political issue.The first dilemma is that if a constitutional explanation is made, it may be questioned that Taiwan has abandoned the national unified vision of the country, which will stimulate the mainland authorities to adopt a more compulsory unified policy and strengthen the legitimacy of their martial arts.The constitutional constitutional stalemate may be caused, as well as the extreme conflict and confrontation of legislative power and judicial power.
Furthermore, throwing out the nation's unified front words, shaping the ultimate goal of abandoning the national unity, and getting closer to the goal of pursuing legal independence.Before Tsai Ing -wen took office in the second term, the British legislators filed a reid of the Cross -Strait Regulations, which had been read, deleted the national unified front words, and defined only the national jurisdiction field and the islands of the golden horse in Taiwan.It has been criticized by the independence of the Taiwan independence, and questioned the steady tone of the Corresponding Cross -Strait policy proposed by the Cai government.
Whether it is the constitutional amendment or the regulations of the Cross -Strait to remove the national unity of the country. Once successful, it is enough to confirm that the DPP no longer regards the unity of the country as the only option.In the past, the DPP claimed that the future of Taiwan was determined by 23 million people. The amendment to the constitutional amendments and the amendments to the Cross -Strait regulations advocated the concept of traditional people's self -determination and tried to implement the constitution and legal level.One of the options.Today, the DPP proposal has taken the initiative to withdraw two bills, which is tantamount to declared the only development goal of the national unity at the constitution and legal level.
In the end, the Democratic Progressive Party legislators advocated that they went to the country to reunite in the constitutional amendment or the law, and often flowed into the prolonged proposal and afterwards.When the director of the Legislative President You Xizheng announced the withdrawal of the proposal, he asked if he had any objections. As a result, the proposal of the proposal did not express any objections.At the same time, none of the DPP, the power of the times, and the non -party legislative members of the DPP, and no party members had proposed the case to complete the case.Such a light proposal to stimulate the bottom line of cross -strait policies of the mainland authorities, and withdraw the case, damaged the DPP policy initiative and legislative prestige, and caught it into the legislative predicament of retreating Valley Valley and Zuozhi.
This highlights the short -term behavior of some Democratic Progressive Party elites to go to the unified national unity. It is necessary to appease the basic doctrine and take into account the position of the middle voter policy.This also shows that as the random proposal of the ruling party legislative committee, he does not hesitate to stimulate the enemy's hostility to soothe the independence of radicals.At the same time, this also caused the Pan -blue political party and intermediate voters to question whether the DPP must maintain the status quo or change the status quo.Similar proposals have been precedent for many times, but finally endlessly disordered after provoking sensitive political nerves.Although the DPP emphasizes that it is only a proposal for individual legislators and has not discussed with the party and groups in advance. It is also a non -party version of proposal, but the major issues of cross -strait issues are important issues. They must be prudent and not blindly supported.It is such a serious constitutional issue, how can the ruling party repeatedly become so light and irritable?
The author is an assistant professor at the Department of Public Affairs of Taiwan Foguang University
