TAICHUNG (Taiwan News) — So I have a new king. Hearing “God save the King” still sounds jarring, odd, unfamiliar.
When I was in elementary school, all the children were herded into the gym that doubled as the auditorium to celebrate the Queen’s jubilee. A terrible recording of "God save the Queen" was played through a horrible sound system, but the kids didn’t know the words, only the older teachers did.
Boring speeches followed, and we were all given a valueless commemorative coin issued by the Province of British Columbia. My young mind wondered why we were making so much fuss over an old lady who lived halfway around the world.
The technical answer, of course, is the constitution, which emerged out of the British Empire’s long, slow, and mercifully peaceful handing over of sovereignty. If the empire across the Taiwan Strait were so gracious and far-sighted when it came to Taiwan, Tibet, East Turkestan, Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, Macao and Hong Kong, the world would be a much happier place.
I was surprised at how moved I was at the passing of the queen, whose reign encompassed nearly half of Canada’s history. She was genuinely a remarkable person, and respected for her steadfast dedication.
But now it’s time to have a discussion in Canada about the constitution and the monarch. Not out of any animosity toward Britain, far from it. It is to be hoped that the warm relations with the U.K. are maintained and strengthened.
Nor out of any rancour towards King Charles III, who seems like a nice man and I have no doubt he would serve as our head of state with “loyalty, respect and love” as he put it. The reasons I support a discussion are all positive and forward-looking, not based on any hostility, though some Canadians have historical animosities towards the crown.
Put it to the question
Two questions need to be asked.
First, does a British king really represent our diverse and distant Canadian society? Second, does a monarchy represent Canadian values?
Alas, we’re probably going to be stuck with the monarchy for some time, though. Changing the constitution is very hard, and figuring out what to replace the role of the monarch legally is likely to be contentious.
Taiwan's constitution is also from overseas
The constitution in force in Taiwan is also of overseas origin and reflects the history of a different time and place. It was passed by the National Assembly of the Republic of China (ROC) in Nanjing on Dec. 25, 1946 and came into force a year later on the same day.
Incidentally, from 1963 to 2001, Constitution Day was a national holiday. That was convenient for the longest-serving presidents during that period (Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正), Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) and Lee Tung-hui 李登輝)), because they were Christians and it gave the nation a day off that happened to fall on Christmas.
Interestingly, there is some confusion over Article 4, which many have thrown about as defining the Republic of China’s territory as including all of China, Tibet, East Turkestan, Manchuria and even Mongolia. Old martial law era maps include Mongolia, and students in Taiwan at the time were told the ROC was the second-largest country in the world, something this Canadian took exception to.
The article actually reads: “The territory of the Republic of China according to its existing national boundaries shall not be altered except by resolution of the National Assembly.”
Free China
Further additional articles refer to the “free area of the ROC” but nowhere does the constitution actually define what those “national boundaries” are. Considering it was written in the middle of a civil war with shifting boundaries that was probably intentional.
That the history that formed the basis behind the constitution has very little to do with Taiwan is right there in the beginning of the preamble: “The National Assembly of the Republic of China, by virtue of the mandate received from the whole body of citizens, in accordance with the teachings bequeathed by Dr. Sun Yat-sen in founding the Republic of China”. I used “very little to do with” rather than “nothing to do with” because Sun Yat-sen and the ROC were inspirations to the Taiwanese founders of Taiwan’s first political party in the 1920s, but that’s a fairly weak link.
The ROC was founded by revolutionaries who were dedicated to overthrowing their foreign Manchurian rulers and restoring native Chinese rule (反清復明). Taiwan was part of the Japanese Empire at the time, and largely cut off from the Chinese revolution.
Curiously, the constitution set out a five-branch system of government that included two branches that were of Imperial Chinese origin: The Control Yuan and Examination Yuan. The first has powers of oversight and impeachment, the latter administers tests and various civil service functions.
Less than a month after the constitution came into force in January 1948 elections were held in China, and the victors were overwhelmingly the Kuomintang (KMT) and their puppet parties. Those elected in 1948 continued to represent their constituencies until 1991 because “elections couldn’t be held on the mainland,” which turned the legislature into a glorified nursing home towards the end.
Only a couple of months after taking office, however, the constitution was effectively put into stasis with the “Temporary Provisions Effective during the Period of Communist Rebellion” coming into force. “Temporary” lasted over 40 years and it was only lifted in 1991, paving the way for democratization based on the original constitution.
Time for change
Since 1991 the constitution has undergone a surprisingly high seven revisions, in spite of changing the constitution not being a simple matter. However, to solidify and make democracy function in Taiwan, many of those revisions were necessary and were negotiated between all the major parties at the time, including the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Not all were necessarily helpful for democratization. The final set of revisions in 2005 that established the size of the legislature at 113 and making constituency voting first-past-the-post was hashed out between the two major parties, and had the effect of crushing smaller parties, much to the benefit of both the KMT and DPP.
This year may see the introduction of an eighth revision if the referendum on lowing the voting age to 18 passes on election day. It is supported by all the major parties, including the KMT, which it would actually hurt because they have virtually no support amongst that age group.
However, most likely the KMT decided that if it was ever going to have any hope of winning back younger voters, they couldn’t be seen opposing it. They did try to decouple it from the 9-in-1 local elections, which would have almost certainly killed it because it wouldn’t be likely to pass the half of all eligible voters threshold due to lower voter turnout for a single issue vote.
Does Taiwan need a new constitution?
There are many, including Vice President Lai Ching-te (賴清德), who have called for a new constitution. A serious discussion on this would be welcome, and should come with two questions.
First, does a constitution written for China really represent diverse and distant Taiwan? Second, does a constitution originally written effectively by and for a single Chinese political party represent Taiwanese values?
This won’t happen as long as President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is in power. So far she has shown little appetite for wholesale changes. However, if in 2024, Lai does win the presidential election, and has a large enough legislative majority in combination with other parties, it just might.
