By Li Zexu
A revised version of Taiwan’s Fiscal Revenue and Expenditure Allocation Act, passed in its third reading by the Legislative Yuan on Nov. 14, was originally required to be promulgated by Dec.15. However, on the afternoon of that deadline, Premier Cho Jung-tai announced that he would refuse to countersign the bill, citing constitutional violations and serious risks to national governance.
At a press conference titled “Defending the Constitutional Order,” Cho said the revised law infringes upon executive authority, violates democratic principles of transparency and substantive deliberation, and—if implemented—would cause irreversible harm to Taiwan’s national development. He stated that he would exercise his constitutional authority to withhold his countersignature in order to safeguard the constitutional system.
According to available records, former premier Hau Pei-tsun once declined to countersign a personnel appointment. However, Cho’s refusal to countersign a duly passed law marks the first such case in Taiwan’s constitutional history.
Legislative passage and executive objection
After the Legislative Yuan amended the Fiscal Allocation Law late last year to release additional central government revenues, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) used their absolute majority on Nov.14 to pass another revision in its third reading. The amendment aimed to ensure that earmarked subsidies allocated to local governments would not be subject to central government adjustments.
For the best of our weekly content！
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Check your email to complete sign up
The Executive Yuan argued that the newly passed provisions were unworkable. On Dec. 5, it submitted a formal request for reconsideration to the Legislative Yuan, but the motion failed. On Dec. 15, the Executive Yuan confirmed that Premier Cho would not countersign the bill, rendering it unable to take effect.
Under Article 37 of the Constitution of the Republic of China, laws promulgated by the president and executive orders must be countersigned by the premier, or jointly countersigned by the premier and the relevant ministers. This authority is commonly referred to as the countersignature power.
‘Constitutional remedies exhausted’
The Executive Yuan held the Dec.15 press conference with Premier Cho, Vice Premier Cheng Li-chun, Secretary-General Chang Tun-han, Minister without Portfolio Lin Ming-hsin, and Minister of Finance Chuang Tsui-yun in attendance.
Cho said disputes over unconstitutional legislative overreach have arisen repeatedly in the Legislative Yuan. He noted that he had personally met with Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu as well as leaders of various party caucuses, and that President Lai Ching-te had twice sought cross-branch consultations with the heads of the five branches of government in hopes of promoting political dialogue and long-term stability.
Cho said it was regrettable that Speaker Han declined the president’s invitation, once again closing the door to discussion, consultation, and cooperation.
On the day general interpellations concluded for the current legislative session, Cho said he reiterated that bipartisan cooperation reflects the public’s greatest expectation. He said he remained willing to work with all parties in the national interest and on behalf of every citizen.
However, regarding the reconsideration motion on the Fiscal Allocation Law, Cho said the Legislative Yuan refused to schedule an explanation by the Executive Yuan and rejected further dialogue outright. The Executive Yuan’s alternative version of the law was never placed on the review agenda.
“At this point,” Cho said, “the Executive Yuan has exhausted all available constitutional remedies. Refusing to countersign is the only remaining path.”
Constitutional responsibility, not executive overreach
Cho emphasized that the Constitution explicitly grants the premier countersignature authority. In the face of unconstitutional or unlawful legislation, he said, withholding a countersignature to prevent harm to the nation is not only justified, but a constitutional duty.
“Acting with the highest loyalty to the nation and the Constitution,” Cho said, “I exercised my authority earlier today to refuse the countersignature on the presidential order.”
He stressed that this action does not constitute executive dominance or authoritarianism. Rather, it reflects the constitutional design of checks and balances. If the Legislative Yuan disagrees with the premier’s decision, Cho noted, it may initiate a vote of no confidence under Article 3, Paragraph 2, Subparagraph 3 of the Additional Articles of the Constitution, thereby providing a political counterweight.
Taiwan Premier Calls No-Confidence Risk a ‘Badge of Democratic Honor’
According to the Central News Agency, when asked about the potential risk of a no-confidence vote, Cho responded that if an unconstitutional legislature and political parties sought his removal, it would be “a badge of democratic honor” in his life.
“I am willing to be a fighter for the Constitution,” Cho said. “I am willing to stand with courageous citizens and walk this path of defending the Constitution and the nation.”
In his formal written statement explaining the refusal to countersign, Cho wrote that under Article 37 of the Constitution, laws promulgated by the president require the premier’s countersignature. Constitutionally, the Executive Yuan and Legislative Yuan hold distinct powers over budget proposals and budget approval, forming the foundation of fiscal governance.
He said the latest amendments to the Fiscal Allocation Law departed from democratic principles and the separation of powers, seriously infringing upon executive authority and constituting a clear and significant constitutional violation. To safeguard the Executive Yuan’s constitutionally granted budgetary authority and fulfill his responsibility for governance, Cho said he had decided not to countersign the amendments as an expression of constitutional loyalty.
Presidential Office and opposition responses
Following the decision, the Office of the President issued a statement. Presidential spokesperson Kuo Ya-hui said that President Lai, in approving the draft order for promulgating the amendments, had concluded that the revisions undermine fiscal sustainability.
She said Premier Cho subsequently added his refusal to countersign in order to fulfill his constitutional duty of loyalty and to uphold fiscal integrity. The president also sent formal letters to the heads of the five branches of government.
Kuo quoted President Lai’s remarks, which stated that previous revisions already raised concerns about executive encroachment and that the Executive Yuan had petitioned for constitutional interpretation. The latest amendments, Lai said, not only weaken central government finances and constrain policymaking, but also exacerbate vertical and horizontal fiscal imbalances between central and local governments. They risk crowding out funding for key social policies, undermining national security, and weakening disaster response capabilities.
Political backlash and counterarguments
KMT spokesperson Niu Hsu-ting responded that the legislature had followed proper parliamentary procedures and passed the law by majority vote. Since the reconsideration motion upheld the original decision, he said, the Executive Yuan should accept the outcome.
Niu accused Cho of unilaterally interpreting the Constitution and refusing to carry out a legitimate legislative decision. He added that recent recall election outcomes had reaffirmed public opinion, and argued that the ruling party should accept the reality of a divided government if it respects democratic norms.
Original article
Comments