Legislative Yuan Must Maintain Order and Uphold the Law

Legislative Yuan Must Maintain Order and Uphold the Law
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 17, 2012

Summary: On Friday the U.S. beef imports bill was stalled in the legislature. Speaker of the Legislature Wang Jin-pyng issued a reprimand to the DPP. But suppose the same farce is reenacted during the emergency session of the legislature? In that case, an ounce of prevention will be worth a pound of cure. Otherwise the public may conclude that the Speaker of the Legislature is responsibile for the paralysis of the legislature.

Full Text below:

The legislature is the place where political parties discuss official business. Two concepts are involved: "political parties" and "the discussion of official business."

The role of political parties is to advocate policies and transform them into law. The role of the legislature is to provide a forum for the discussion of official business. That means the Legislative Yuan must keep itself in running order. That means ultimate responsibility for keeping the Legislative Yuan in running order falls upon the shoulders of the Speaker of the Legislature.

Article III of the Legislative Yuan Organic Law states, "The Legislative Yuan must adhere to the principle of neutrality and fairness. It must maintain order within the Legislative Yuan and deal with the official business of the Legislative Yuan in accordance with the Legislative Yuan's rules of procedure." The law clearly states that order must be maintained within the Legislative Yuan, that the proceedings of the Legislative Yuan must be carried out in accordance with the rules of the Legislative Yuan, and that the responsibility for ensuring that the rules are followed falls upon the Legislative Yuan. The principle of neutrality and fairness means that the Legislative Yuan must adopt a neutral stance. It must allow all parties to express their viewpoints. Every party must be assured its legal rights. No party may be granted extralegal privileges. Once the various parties have had the opportunity to make their views known, the Legislative Yuan must ensure the completion of the voting process. This is the ultimate goal of the Legislative Yuan's principle of neutrality and fairness. This is the Legislative Yuan's legal duty: to maintain order and conduct official business.

Legislators often "occupy" the dais in the Legislative Yuan using brute force, so that voting cannot be carried out. This phenomenon is becoming more frequent and more violent. Some people are actually boasting that they "participated in the historic five day four night occupation of the Legislative Yuan." How did the situation degenerate to this level? It degenerated to this level because Legislative Yuan officials have never properly distinguished between partisan politics and official business. They treat official business like partisan politics. They treat parliamentary procedure like partisan politics. They forget that Legislative Yuan officials are responsible for maintaining order. They forget that maintaining order is the inescapable legal responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature.

U.S. beef imports have been stalled because the DPP has occupied the dais. The public is waiting to see how the Special Session of the Legislative Yuan will play out. The legislature was paralyzed for five days and four nights. The media invoked the terminology of war to describe the Blue vs. Green confrontation. One side was "defending its position to the death." The other side was "trying to seize the high ground." Those "defending their position to the death" boasted that they "weren't afraid to shed blood." Those "trying to seize the high ground" were mocked as "cowards afraid to fight." The legislature may convene an emergency session. But will it reenact the same farce? Will the DPP re-occupy the dais, so that it may strut before the public? Will the KMT once again fear to attack, only to be mocked as weak and incompetent? Members of the public come across like cheerleaders. One side shouts "Hold that line! Even if you are bleeding you must hold your positions! The other side shouts "Charge! Even if they draw blood, you must take the high ground!"

Party A occupies the dais. Can the business of the legislature proceed? Astonishingly enough, many onlookers assume the answer depends on whether Party B can physically drag Party A off the dais! This farcical scene shows that the Legislative Yuan is no longer in working order. It shows that the Speaker of the Legislature is derelict in his duty. Legislative Yuan officials sit idly by as a minority violently disrupts the workings of the legislature, and denies majority legislators the right to express their views and cast their votes. This clearly favors a violent minority and hurts a peaceful majority. It clearly contravenes the principle of neutrality and fairness. It clearly constitutes a failure to maintain order. It clearly constitutes a dereliction of duty.

The Legislative Yuan is supposed to conducts its business in accordance with the law. Yet the Green Camp has occupied the dais and is preventing the Blue Camp from conducting official Legislative Yuan business. The public has been led to believe that the outcome depends upon which camp wins at "King of the Mountain." The public has been led to believe that this fight to the bitter end will decide winners and losers. The public has been led to believe that the Legislative Yuan is a battleground where criminal gangs wage turf wars. The public has been led to believe that only when blood has been drawn, can the gladiatorial combat end. This truly is outrageous beyond belief.

A political party may choose to follow proper protocol. It may choose to "occupy" the dais using brute force. But Legislative Yuan officials may not pass the buck on to political parties. They may not watch and see who fractures whose skull. They must ensure neutrality and fairness. They must maintain order. They must enable the conduct of official business. The Legislative Yuan must resume being a place where we count heads. In other words, the responsibility for maintaining order within the legislature falls upon the shoulders of the Speaker of the Legislature, not the political parties. The political parties have their own agendas. The Speaker of the Legislature must ensure fairness and neutrality. He must fulfill his duty to maintain order.

The Speaker of the Legislature may have his own approach to such matters. Moderates may want the Speaker to be tolerant and accommodating. Radicals may want the Speaker to "go by the book," i.e., abide by the Legislative Yuan Security Guard Duty Regulations. and invoke his police powers. The Speaker of the Legislature may choose his approach. He can use both the carrot and the stick. The one thing he may not do is shirk responsibility and permit the officia business of the legislature to be brought to a standstill. He must ensure that neutrality and fairness are not compromised. He must be diliegent in his duty. Anything else would amount to hypocrisy.

Consider the Speaker of the Legislature's police powers. The Speaker of the Legislature need not wait until someone has occupied the dais before ordering security guards into action. He can anticipate a major conflict. He can assign security guards to occupy the dais in advance. He can adopt a defensive posture. Then if some legislators commit assault and battery, they will clearly be the aggressors. They will be held accountable. That will avoid a conflict between legislators. The conflict may be ended without physical injury.

On Friday the U.S. beef imports bill was stalled in the legislature. Speaker of the Legislature Wang Jin-pyng issued a reprimand to the DPP. But suppose the same farce is reenacted during the emergency session of the legislature? In that case, an ounce of prevention will be worth a pound of cure. Otherwise the public may conclude that the Speaker of the Legislature is responsibile for the paralysis of the legislature.

立法院長有維護議事秩序的終極責任
【聯合報╱社論】

2012.06.17

國會是「政黨議事」的場域，因此可分「政黨」與「議事」兩塊。

「政黨」的工作在表達政策立場，及選擇議事策略；至於「議事」之能否充分折衝及完整進行，則有賴立院本身之機制來維繫，又以立法院長擔負最後的責任。

《立法院組織法》第三條：「立法院長應本公平中立原則，維持立法院秩序，處理議事。」此法明白指出，維持立法院秩序，使得議事程序能完整進行，是立法院長應當承當的責任。至於稱「應本公平中立原則」，係指立法院長應居「中立原則」之立場，讓各方意見充分折衝，沒有一方會少一點法定權益，亦沒有一方能多一點非法的特權；待各方充分折衝之後，立法院長即應保證完成表決投票，這始是立法院長「應本公平中立之原則」的終極實踐，這也才是立法院長完整履行了「維持秩序，處理議事」的法定職責。

立法院經常出現有人霸占主席台，以致不能進行表決投票的情勢；而且越演越烈，如今甚至有人標榜，完成了「霸占主席台五天四夜」的「歷史偉業」。揆其因果，主要的原由即在立法院當局始終未將「政黨」與「議事」兩個領域作合理的區分，以致將政見折衝交給了「政黨」，亦將維持「議事」的秩序也交給了「政黨」，忘掉了維持議事秩序應是立院當局的體制責任，也是立法院長無可旁貸的法定職責。

美牛案因民進黨霸占主席台而告擱淺，國人正等著看立法院在臨時會中將如何演出。五天四夜的僵持，媒體皆用戰鬥術語來形容藍綠對峙，一方是「死守」，另一方則是「仰攻」；「死守者」宣稱「不惜流血」，「仰攻者」則被譏為「孬種怯戰」。那麼，在接下來的臨時會中，難道仍要上演同樣的鬧劇？民進黨再度霸占主席台，以此驕傲地向國人炫耀；國民黨若「不敢進攻」，則被譏為懦弱無能！整個輿情彷彿瘋狂的啦啦隊，一方喊：要挺住，流血也要占住主席台！另一方則叫：衝啊，流血也要搶回主席台！

甲黨占據了主席台，議事能否繼續進行，竟然全視乙黨能否自力「排除」而定；在這個場景中，立法院的體制已告失能，立法院長則是失職。立法院坐視暴力的少數阻擋議事，而令多數的一方喪失藉投票來表達政見的法定權利；這在效應上是明顯地偏袒了暴力的少數，而傷害了多數的權益，已然違背「公平中立原則」，更未履行「維持秩序，處理議事」的基本職責，這難道不是失能失職？

立法院是依法議事之處，如今居然聽任藍綠各據主席台上下兩方；彷彿非要看究竟是一方守得住、還是他方攻得下，拚出個你死我活，以此判定輸贏勝負。這簡直是把立法院看成了黑幫械鬥的黑街，好像不流血，就不准收場；真是豈有此理到了極點。

如前所述，「政黨」可以選擇「議事」的策略，因此可以占據主席台；但立院當局卻不能把責任歸給「政黨」，等著看誰把誰的頭打破，而「應本公平中立原則」，「維持秩序，處理議事」，使立法院回歸「數人頭」的機制。也就是說，主持議事秩序的責任在院長，而不在政黨；因為，政黨各有策略的計算，唯院長必須「本公平中立原則」，履行其維持議事秩序的法定職責。

立法院長可以選擇他的風格。溫和者，希望院長展現寬宏與包容的胸襟；激進者，則認為可依《立法院警衛勤務規則》，動用議場警察權。在這兩種風格中，立法院長可以自作選擇，或寬猛並濟，唯不可故示開明，而使議事癱瘓，喪失了「公平中立原則」，失能失職，那就是鄉愿。

即以警察權而言，院長其實不必等有人占據主席台後，令警衛上攻解圍；而似可在預見重大衝突前，令警衛事先「占據」主席台，採守勢的防禦布置。如此，委員若要扮演攻擊者，作態交代即可；不致演成攻守皆是委員、不流血即不能收場的困局。

周五美牛案擱淺，王金平院長對民進黨發出譴責；但是，倘若臨時會仍將演出同樣戲碼，事前的處置，必定會好過事後的譴責。否則，國人恐怕會說：誰應負使國會癱瘓的責任，立法院長是其中之一。