Taiwan Democracy: What’s happening in the Taiwanese parliament?

13 min readJun 6, 2024

Primer to the 2024 legislative brawls that gave rise to the Bluebird Movement

Chaos in the Taiwanese parliament on May 17, as photographed by CNA and Liberty Times, have sparked a civil protest movement (aerial footage provided by the Taiwan Economic Democracy Union) across the country.

WHAT HAPPENED?

An unprecedented brawl took place amongst Taiwanese lawmakers on May 17, resulting in six hospitalizations. The chaotic incident drew public attention to the bills and amendments that were being fast-tracked for legislative passage, and a spontaneous protest of roughly 100 people took place in front of the Legislative Yuan, as the Taiwanese parliament is officially known, that night.

Local activists began organizing rallies — 30,000 turnout on May 21 (Tues), 100,000 on May 24 (Fri), and 70,000 on May 28 (Tues) in Taipei, accompanied by solidarity protests across the nation — for people to support the legislators opposing the abrupt expansion of legislative power without room for deliberation.

The contentious reform package has now passed its third parliamentary reading and could face examination by the 15 Justices of the Constitutional Court. The protests have consolidated into the Bluebird Movement.

Those who support the reform package say the legislative majority should be respected.

Those who oppose the package say the form of democracy is being used to quell its spirit.

SIX FACES YOU SHOULD KNOW

Legislators Puma Shen (DPP), Huang Kuo-chang (TPP), and Kuo Kuo-wen (DPP)

Legislative Yuan Speaker Han Kuo-yu (KMT) and lawmakers Hsu Chiao-hsin (KMT) and Fu Kun-chi (KMT)

PUMA SHEN (沈伯洋, 41): DPP legislator, educator, and co-founder of the Doublethink Lab on global influence operations and the Kuma Academy for civilian defense and disaster preparedness. Photos of Shen, who was climbing over lawmakers barricading an entry to the chamber before being tossed down during the May 17 scuffles at the Taiwanese parliament, have gone viral; he was hospitalized for a concussion after landing on his head. The incident revealed that Shen has a habit of donning a bulletproof vest.

HUANG KUO-CHANG (黃國昌, 50): TPP caucus convener, former New Power Party chairman, and former Sunflower Movement trailblazer who once stormed and occupied the parliament in demand of greater lawmaking transparency from the KMT government of 2014. His recent alignment with the KMT and the ambiguous reversal of his political ideals have led to Taiwanese memes such as a wanted poster asking “Have you seen this man?” with a picture of a younger Huang holding a sunflower. Claims that Kuo Kuo-wen slapped him.

KUO KUO-WEN (郭國文, 57): DPP legislator, former deputy minister of labor, and former Tainan City Council member. A video of him snatching a printed copy of the reform package from the hands of the Legislative Yuan’s elderly deputy secretary-general — in an attempt to delay voting — and sprinting out of the parliamentary doors went viral on May 17. Kuo sustained tailbone injuries from falling off a table in a separate incident the same day. Claims that he pushed Huang Kuo-chang’s face away to avoid his spittle.

HAN KUO-YU (韓國瑜, 66): Speaker of the Legislative Yuan, former general manager of the Taipei Agricultural Products Marketing Corp., and the KMT’s 2020 presidential candidate. During his tenure as Kaohsiung mayor, Han became the first mayor to be recalled in Taiwan. During his tenure as legislator, Han once flipped fellow legislator Chen Shui-bian’s table and struck Chen’s head with his fist in 1993.

HSU CHIAO-HSIN (徐巧芯, 34): Youngest female legislator in the KMT caucus, political firebrand who once advised young politicians to steer clear of the KMT if they don’t come from politically connected families, and whistleblower who alleged votes could be purchased during the KMT’s central standing committee elections. She was the spokesperson for Hung Hsiu-chu’s 2015 presidential campaign, then for Eric Chu when he replaced Hung as the KMT candidate. She then served as Ma Ying-jeou’s post-presidency spokesperson from 2016 to 2018.

FU KUN-CHI (傅崐萁, 62): KMT caucus whip, former Hualien County magistrate who defeated Bi-khim Hsiao in the 2020 legislative elections, and target of Hsu Chiao-hsin’s vote-buying allegations. Known as the Hualien Monarch (花蓮王) for his hold on Hualien politics — his wife is currently Hualien magistrate after a bogus divorce — he once put his own face on elementary school exercise books. 23 days after a 7.2-magnitude quake devastated Hualien this April, Fu led a KMT delegation to China and met with Wang Huning, the 4th most powerful CCP member.

KMT stands for the Chinese Nationalist Party, steward and defender of the Republic of China, an identity it has held steadfast to despite the Nationalists’ retreat from China to Taiwan in 1949.

DPP stands for the Democratic Progressive Party, the first major opposition party of Taiwan that bloomed from anti-establishment movements against the Nationalists’ past militant reign.

TPP stands for the Taiwan’s People Party, a relatively young political party positioning itself as a charismatic third-party option for those frustrated with the current state of Taiwan.

The KMT currently holds 52 seats in the 113-member Legislative Yuan, and there are 2 independent legislators closely aligned with the KMT caucus. The DPP holds 51 seats, while the TPP’s 8 votes were once seen as sway votes.

In recent parliamentary readings presided by Speaker Han, the KMT has formed a supermajority with the TPP, giving rise to an uncanny efficiency in their passage of bills.

LOGIC BEHIND THE PROTESTS

Why the legislative violence?

Supporters say the DPP are trying to obstruct legislative proceedings by engaging in violence.

Those who disagree with the reform package say that physical altercation was a last-ditched filibuster move to halt the motion to vote in bills that would grant the legislature over-arching control and unbalance the separation of powers.

Fun Fact: Taiwan’s legislature won the 1995 Ig Nobel Peace Prize “for demonstrating that politicians gain more by punching, kicking and gouging each other than by waging war against other nations.”

But wasn’t proper due process observed?

Supporters say that the legislative majority have the right to reign. Those who disagree cite a lack of democratic discussion without the usual clause-by-clause deliberation, and the majority’s use of technicalities to rush passage. To quote the DPP’s Puma Shen, “I was present for one of those seven-hour sessions and was only allowed to speak for 7 minutes. The rest was just reading through the bill and passing it directly.”

Fun Fact: Instead of opening the floor to all legislators for debate, the parliamentary majority opted out of established procedures by declaring each political caucus could only sent forth one representative speaker, who would then be limited to a one-time speech of three minutes per clause review. Each clause was then passed by majority with no further opportunity to challenge its content.

What is this NT$2 trillion figure all about?

NT$2 trillion (US$61.92 billion) refers to politician Miao Boya and the DPP’s estimated cost of an infrastructure package proposed by KMT’s Fu Kun-chi. The proposal’s flagship project will be to build a round-island high-speed rail (HSR) that entails drilling through the formidable Central Mountain Range, followed by the creation of a new highway connecting eastern and western Taiwan, as well as the extension of an existing highway to Hualien, all to be finished within ten years.

Supporters say strengthening transportation infrastructure will help revitalize Hualien’s post-quake economy and make the east coast more accessible for tourism.

Those who oppose the package point to a lack of studies on both cost effectiveness and environmental assessment, the infeasibility of tunneling through Taiwan’s principal mountain range, and the fact that Hualien is situated in an active seismic zone. Moreover, the likely depletion of government coffers would have an adverse impact on the country’s national defense budget.

For comparison, Taiwan’s annual expenditure for this year is projected to be NT$2.88 trillion (US$90.6 billion).

If Fu’s trio of bills are passed, the concern then will be that China-backed construction companies will win the public tenders and force Taiwan into the CCP’s Belt-and-Road scheme through investments and imported labor.

Fun Fact: A portion of the existing HSR connecting Taipei to Kaohsiung is already sinking, due to subsidence caused by excessive draining of underground water reservoirs.

Why the show of hands?

Supporters say it is within Legislative Yuan Speaker Han Kuo-yu’s powers to dictate how legislators vote. Those who disagree with Han’s decision note that he chose an unreliable and unaccountable method of voting that is also the quickest way to pass the bills. For example, the DPP caucus had 51 legislators present on May 21, but the official tally at one point was acknowledged as 53 DPP votes.

Since a show of hands does not require the KMT legislators occupying the speaker’s podium to return to their seats, it was also helpful in keeping other legislators from gaining the right to address the chamber.

Fun Fact: Voting machines were introduced to the Taiwanese parliament in 1992. Before then, voting by a show of hands was routine at the now-defunct National Assembly, the “10,000-year congress” that was controlled by the same lawmakers for 44 years straight, from 1947 to 1991.

Why not recall some of these legislators?

Supporters say that legislators cannot be recalled before they serve a full year of their four-year term. Those who despise the current state of the legislature are counting down to Feb. 1, 2025, the earliest date possible to initiate recall elections for legislators representing electoral districts. Legislators-at-large, however, cannot be recalled. This means that all 8 TPP legislators are immune to recall campaigns.

Fun Fact: Now TPP caucus convener, Huang Kuo-chang survived a recall attempt as a legislator representing the New Power Party in 2017.

Since the bills were passed anyway, did all the people march for nothing?

Supporters of the legislative majority say the protests had no impact on the parliamentary readings. Those who are wary of the reform package and current legislative proceedings believe that the Bluebird Movement helped inform the public about the legal and political ramifications of the passed bills. The 100K turnout in Taipei on May 24 also demonstrates to the world the unpopularity of these bills, which can provide legitimacy to future action taken by other branches of the government to review these proceedings.

Civil society organizations like the Taiwan Economic Democracy Union helped secure the legal road rights and protest licenses for the May 21, 24, and 28 civil protests next to the Legislative Yuan in central Taipei.

Fun Fact: First named after the rally site outside the Legislative Yuan, Qingdao E. Road (青島東路), the Qingdao movement was renamed Bluebird (青鳥行動) to evade keyword censors in the Meta-verse (Facebook, Instagram, Threads) and to honor the bluebird’s status as a harbinger of happiness. Homophones such as “Blue Bird, Winter Deer (青鳥冬鹿)” were also creatively used as hashtags to share information and resources.

What was passed on May 28 anyways?

A new offence called “Contempt of the Legislature” that carries a fine up to NT$200,000 (US$6,215) or be sentenced up to one year in jail. People summoned by lawmakers cannot refuse to answer any question, and their right to be accompanied by a lawyer can be denied by the speaker of the Legislative Yuan.

Supporters say that the innocent have nothing to fear. Protestors fear a political witch hunt.

New investigative powers that enable lawmakers to procure testimonies, information, and documents from all government agencies, the military, associations, and private citizens. Those deemed uncooperative can be repeatedly fined for as much as NT$100,000 (US$3,245) each time. Public servants face jail time of under one year if their statements are considered untruthful. “Reverse questioning” will not be tolerated.

Supporters say that the innocent have nothing to fear. Protestors believe this gives the legislative majority too much unchecked power.

The president of Taiwan now has to answer all queries put forth by lawmakers, on the spot, right after delivering an annual State of the Nation address at the Legislative Yuan, and is mandated to do so before every March 1.

Supporters say the president should answer to the people. Protestors sees this as a move to undermine the executive branch.

The kicker: the amendments that were passed did not specify the currency used for awarding fines. It wrote “Yuan (元)” instead of “New Taiwan Dollars (新臺幣).” So technically, each fine amount can be tripled, according to the “Act Governing the Conversion of Currency Units Used in Existing Laws and Regulations into New Taiwan Dollars.”

Supporters say it was an innocent mistake. Protestors cite this as an example of how hastily the amendments were put together and not properly scrutinized.

Taiwanese illustrators and designers have made their artworks freely available to all those to support the Bluebird Movement. People can simply scan a QR code and print it out at any 7–Eleven.

I’ve heard enough from you, Min Chao. What are other people saying?

The Taiwan Bar Association (Mandarin + English) on May 18:

The Legislative Yuan has failed to substantively discuss or review the four bills before it and instead has rushed them to a plenary vote directly. This failure to perform its constitutional function of deliberating on laws and budgets not only undermines Taiwan’s democratic foundations, but also violates the fundamental principles of democratic constitutionalism and representative democracy. This Bar Association expresses its strongest condemnation.

A group of scholars, including former AIT Director William Stanton, on May 20:

The reform proposals that have been put forward are potentially unconstitutional and a usurpation of political power held by other coequal branches of government. They tarnish Taiwan’s image for good governance and further create political rifts at a time it can ill afford to do so, given growing challenges and complexities from Beijing.

A coalition of civil society organizations (statement + petition) on May 24:

We, the undersigned civil society organizations (CSOs) in Taiwan, believe the proposals pose a significant risk to our staff, the people we represent, and our international partners.
Though framed as an attempt to improve oversight of the administration of newly inaugurated President Lai Ching-te, the so-called ‘legal reforms’ include amendments that could be weaponized to target organizations and individuals in possession of sensitive information and material.
Rather than improving oversight, such powers raise fears of retaliatory investigations and may lead to a chilling effect on free expression, association, and assembly.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) on May 24:

RSF echoes NGO coalition’s call for further review of controversial bill expanding the Parliament’s investigative power and which, in its current wording, may pose a threat to journalistic sources.