Restraint urged in constitutional case on government oversight laws

Taipei, Aug. 2 (CNA) Legal scholars have called on the Constitutional Court to exercise restraint when reviewing a case regarding the constitutionality of amendments to government oversight laws passed by the Legislature at the end of May.

At a talk co-hosted by the ROC Constitutional Law Society, attorney and legal professor Nigel Li (李念祖) said the Legislature elected by the people should be allowed sufficient latitude in crafting legislation.

A judicial ruling shackling the legislative body's operations risks undermining the democratic system, said Li, who teaches at Soochow University's law school and serves as a special senior counselor at the law firm Lee and Li.

He was referring to the case brought by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus, the Cabinet, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) and the Control Yuan in a bid to reject the oversight laws that took effect on June 26.

The Constitutional Court has already issued an injunction that halted enforcement of some of the revisions, including those that would have given legislators much broader investigative powers.

The amendments to the Law Governing the Legislative Yuan's Power and the Criminal Code were pushed through by opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People's Party (TPP) lawmakers, who together form a majority in the Legislature.

The DPP-affiliated petitioners maintained that the deliberation that led up to the laws' passage was unconstitutional, arguing that there was a lack of substantive discussions and that ruling party lawmakers were deprived of opportunities to express their views.

The petitioners also sought to challenge the constitutionality of many of the adopted measures, including those expanding the Legislature's investigative powers and requiring the president to address the Legislature periodically and then take questions.

Li cited previous Constitutional Court rulings, however, as saying the court had in the past shown great respect for the "principle of legislative autonomy" provided that the legislative process did not contain "manifest and gross procedural flaws."

The lawyer also argued that the Constitutional Court, when trying to arbitrate constitutional disputes between top government agencies, as in the oversight law case, should refrain from assuming a "too active" role.

Instead, he said, the Constitutional Court should adopt a "minimalist" approach, suggesting that the court render a ruling limited to the specific issues of the current case and avoid setting broad precedents.

Political science professor Su Tzu-chiao (蘇子喬) and law professor Yang Chih-chieh (楊智傑) shared similar views, saying the court should refrain from excessive intervention in the ongoing disputes between the opposition-led Legislature and the other three petitioning agencies.

Su, from Soochow University, said the new measures requiring the president's presence at the Legislature to deliver an annual state of the nation address and then field questions from the floor would not undermine the constitutional system.

Rather, he argued, they would provide an opportunity to "clarify" the current confusion in the division of responsibilities between the president and the premier.

Lai has maintained, however, that according to the Constitution, the president is not accountable to the Legislative Yuan and that the head of state can volunteer, but has no obligation, to address the Legislature.

The new measures confuse the responsibilities of the president with those of the Cabinet, Lai told a press conference on June 24, adding that only the premier, along with Cabinet members, was required to deliver policy reports to the Legislature and take questions from lawmakers.

The DPP has questioned the revisions granting the Legislature new investigative powers and the power to hold hearings, contending that they risked usurping the powers of the Control Yuan and infringing on people's rights to privacy and trade secrets.

Friday's talk was also co-hosted by the National Policy Foundation -- a KMT think tank -- and the Taiwan Administrative Law Association.