Lai formally seeks Constitutional Court ruling on oversight laws

Taipei, June 28 (CNA) President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) on Friday petitioned the Constitutional Court for a ruling on government oversight amendments passed by the Legislature, which require him to address the Legislative Yuan and field questions on the floor.

Presidential Office spokeswoman Karen Kuo (郭雅慧) said in a statement on Friday that attorney Hong Wei-sheng (洪偉勝) filed the petition on behalf of Lai, at the Judicial Yuan Building in Taipei.

Hong also submitted an injunction application in an attempt to pause enforcement of the amendments which took effect on Wednesday, Kuo said.

The president has clearly expressed his opposition to "the expansion of legislative power," Kuo said, noting that the legal action sought to "safeguard constitutional order and protect the rights of the people."

While legislative reform is necessary, such reform must comply with the law and the Constitution, Kuo cited Lai as saying.

The amendments, pushed through the Legislature by opposition Kuomintang and Taiwan People's Party lawmakers on May 28, require the president's presence at the Legislative Yuan to give an annual state of the nation address and then take questions from legislators.

Lai maintains that the new measures are not in line with the Constitution, under which the president is not accountable to the Legislative Yuan, arguing that the president can volunteer but has no obligation to address the Legislature.

The measures confuse the responsibility of the president with that of the Executive Yuan, he told a press conference on June 24, citing the Constitution as saying the premier is required to deliver policy reports to the Legislature and take questions from lawmakers, along with Cabinet members.

The president also expressed concerns over revisions granting the Legislature new investigative powers and the power to hold hearings, noting they risk usurping the powers of the Control Yuan, and infringing on people's rights to privacy and trade secrets.

The amendments include potential penalties and jail time for public officials if they refuse to attend or provide information, or present false information.

In the case of individuals or groups from the private sector, they can face penalties if they are deemed to be uncooperative.

In addition to the president, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus and the Executive Yuan have petitioned the Constitutional Court in their latest efforts to throw out the revisions to the Law Governing the Legislative Yuan's Power and the Criminal Code.

As of Friday afternoon, the Constitutional Court had accepted the DPP caucus' petition and injunction applications submitted on Wednesday.

The Control Yuan, the country's top government watchdog, is expected to follow suit.

July 27: Cabinet formally seeks court injunction, ruling on oversight laws

July 26: DPP caucus formally requests injunction, ruling on oversight laws

According to the Judicial Yuan, there is no fixed timetable for the Constitutional Court to decide whether to grant an injunction or whether a petition will be heard upon receiving applications from petitioners.

An injunction related to a case ceases to have effect six months after its issuance, or once the Constitutional Court renders a ruling on the case, as per the Constitutional Court Procedure Act.

While the Constitutional Court ought to consolidate multiple petitions concerning the same legal disputes, whether the disputes are of the same nature is determined by the justices.

Related News

June 24: KMT, TPP slam Lai over plan to seek constitutional ruling on reform bills

June 21: Legislature votes down Cabinet's reconsideration request

June 12: Parties to campaign across Taiwan ahead of legislative oversight bills vote

June 11: President approves request for Legislature to reconsider bills

May 28

● Amendment criminalizing contempt of Legislature passes into law

● Third reading of major part of 'legislative reform' bills passed

● Taiwan lawmakers have passed contentious reform bills. Now what?