TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan began a two-day debate Wednesday on a proposal to impeach President Lai Ching-te (賴清德), with the opposition and the ruling DPP sharply divided over its legitimacy.
Opposition parties initiated impeachment proceedings after Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) refused to countersign an amendment passed by the legislature. Cho then argued that refusal was his only legal option because the Constitutional Court, the formal dispute-resolution mechanism, was paralyzed.
Pro-DPP legal commentator and lawyer Huang Ti-ying (黃帝穎) said former Premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村) once refused to countersign a presidential appointment made by former President Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), creating precedent for Cho’s decision, per Fount Media. However, it is worth noting that no premier in Taiwan’s history has refused to countersign legislation passed by the legislature, per CNA.
During Wednesday’s debate, opposition lawmakers focused on Lai’s absence from the proceedings and Cho’s refusal to countersign the bill, per CNA. The DPP countered that the impeachment effort was a political stunt, defended Lai’s decision not to attend, and called on the opposition to instead initiate a vote of no confidence against Cho.
KMT caucus leader Fu Kun-chi (傅崐萁) criticized Lai for not appearing, saying the president was evading legislative oversight and his constitutional responsibilities. TPP Chair Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) condemned Cho’s refusal to countersign, arguing that the executive branch must promulgate bills that pass reconsideration, per TVBS.
DPP Legislator Puma Shen (沈伯洋) urged the opposition to pursue a no-confidence vote against Cho, questioning why it would seek an impeachment that could trigger a new legislative election and potentially alter the balance of power, per Liberty Times. Shen said that because both the president and lawmakers are directly elected, the legislature does not exercise oversight over the president.
DPP Legislator Chen Pei-yu (陳培瑜) said the opposition’s goal was to publicly humiliate Lai, arguing they avoided a recall because that process allows written responses rather than in-person questioning, per Tai Sounds. She added that under impeachment procedures, the legislature may invite the president to attend, but the president is not required to do so.
Chen also criticized Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) for what she described as inaction, saying he bears responsibility for what she called the legislature’s paralysis.
Responding to calls for a no-confidence vote, KMT Legislative Caucus Secretary-General Lo Chih-chiang (羅智強) said Lai could simply appoint a new premier if Cho were removed, per ETtoday. He added that if Lai were willing to face another election along with lawmakers, the opposition would be prepared to pursue that route.
On whether Lai should attend the impeachment debate, legal scholars said the president is not required to appear. Former Constitutional Court Justice Huang Hung-hsia (黃虹霞) said Taiwan’s constitutional system grants the legislature oversight of the Cabinet, not the president, per Liberty Times.
Soochow University professor Su Tzu-chiao (蘇子喬) agreed but said that if Lai believes the impeachment lacks merit, he should consider defending himself before lawmakers. Su said such an appearance would allow the public to assess both Lai’s performance and how he is treated, per UDN.
DPP Legislator Wu Szu-yao (吳思瑤) noted that few opposition lawmakers were present during much of the debate, per Newtalk.
Impeachment is intended to remove officials for illegal conduct or dereliction of duty. Presidential impeachment cases originate in the Legislative Yuan and are then referred to the Constitutional Court.
To advance, the impeachment motion must first secure the support of two-thirds of active legislators. With opposition lawmakers lacking the required numbers, the proposal is widely seen as unlikely to move beyond the legislative stage.
