The benefits of a referendum proposed by the Island of Joy and Happiness Coalition calling for a new Taiwan constitution remain unclear.
The News Lens
Date: 2018/04/02
By:Timothy S. Rich
Last month a group of Taiwanese politicians, including former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李
Photo Credit: AP / 達志影像
登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) and members of the the Taiwan Solidarity Union, New Power Party, and the Social Democratic Party, called for a referendum for nextyear to write a new constitution for Taiwan, including changing the name to the Republic of Taiwan.
The Republic of China constitution, in effect since 1947, harkens back to an era when Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正) and the Kuomintang (KMT) fought in vain to stave off territorial losses to the Communists, ultimately retreating to Taiwan yet still holding out for unification under their terms and under their legal framework.
Even ignoring how China would respond to the passing of such referendum, the broader tangible benefits to Taiwan appear overstated.
Arguments in favor of altering this constitution gained prominence with Taiwan’s democratization, although a consensus on such changes proved illusory. Yet constitutional reforms to date have remained piecemeal in nature, meeting practical demands without overtly declaring permanent separation from China. Such post-1991 reforms helped entrench Taiwan’s democratization, namely the direct election of the President, while the suspension the National Assembly (國民大會) and the references to Taiwan as the “Free Area of the Republic of China” (“中華民國自由地區”) continues the lip service that de facto independence does not preclude eventual unification. More broadly, the constitution stands in stark contrast to changes in public perceptions that, according to survey data from National Chengchi University’s Election Study Center, show a majority of citizens since 2009 identify as Taiwanese, compared to a third to identifying as both Chinese and Taiwanese. [FULL STORY]
