TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — The Cabinet’s handling of amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditure has sharpened internal divisions within the DPP.
After the Legislative Yuan rejected the Cabinet’s request on Friday to reconsider its proposed version of the amendment, Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) signaled that the executive branch is under no obligation to implement the opposition-backed bill, per Liberty Times. He said the opposition’s refusal to engage in substantive debate led him to that conclusion.
In past deadlocks, the Constitutional Court has stepped in. But with the Court operating below the legally required number of justices, no dispute-resolution mechanism is currently available. The Cabinet is weighing whether to let President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) promulgate the amendment while simultaneously refusing to enforce it.
Supporters of the Cabinet’s position argue there is no alternative to signing the bill into law. Former DPP Spokesperson Chuo Kuan-ting (卓冠廷) warned that the new rules would force the government to propose a budget that violates existing law, per Liberty Times. He said the opposition should approve Lai’s nominees for Constitutional Court justices so the court can resume its role as arbiter.
Chuo noted that while the executive has previously refused to enforce what it deemed unlawful legislation pending judicial review, outright refusal to sign a bill into law would be unprecedented.
DPP caucus director Chung Chia-pin (鍾佳濱) agreed, emphasizing that if the Cabinet refuses to implement the law, the Legislative Yuan could ask the president to dissolve the Cabinet, which would trigger by-elections for all legislative seats, per China Times. If the opposition declines to pursue this option, he said, it would suggest their stance is less hardline than publicly portrayed.
On the other side, pro-DPP lawyer Huang Ti-ying (黃帝穎) warned of “three major risks” if the Cabinet refuses to enforce the law: civil servants would face conflicting obligations between legal compliance and executive directives; local governments could sue the central government for withholding grants and likely prevail; and civil servants could face criminal liability for acting against the law, per Tai Sounds.
Huang argued that the Cabinet should instead refuse to sign the bill and force the opposition to seek constitutional review.
Lawyer and pro-DPP commentator Lin Chih-chun (林智群) argued that direct confrontation, as Huang suggested, was necessary, per Fount Media. He warned that signing the legislation would give the opposition an opening to accuse the government of violating an existing law and put the Cabinet on the defensive in public.
A Cabinet strategy insider disagreed with Lin’s approach, arguing that the amendment is too complex to explain quickly and that using the “refusal to sign” option now would be politically risky. The insider said this tactic should be reserved for a future proposal that the government believes would be even more damaging.
Soochow University political scientist Su Tzu-chiao (蘇子喬) cautioned that the Constitution leaves no room for the executive to reject legislation passed by the legislature, per Awakening News Networks. He said the Cabinet is constitutionally required to accept the original resolution after its reconsideration request is voted down.
Su also voiced alarm over the continued paralysis of the Constitutional Court. With parties unwilling to compromise during an election year, he noted that one option available to Lai is to invite all parties to submit nominees, which could restore the court’s ability to break the deadlock between the branches.
