Do you think citizens' duties in the Constitution of the Republic of China are unnecessary?

Politics Taiwan Politics
1

I know that this is not unique to the Constitution of the Republic of China. Several other constitutions, such as those of Japan, Italy, South Korea, and Spain, also contain provisions on citizens’ duties. Nevertheless, I believe that a constitution should not impose any duties on citizens at all.

A constitution is meant to restrain government, not citizens. Its function is to protect individual rights, while citizens’ duties should be regulated by ordinary legislation rather than by the constitution itself. The purpose of a constitution is to prevent government from infringing upon rights that no reasonable person would willingly surrender.

No private citizen can violate the constitution in the same sense as the government can, and therefore individuals do not have any direct constitutional obligations. This is not to say that citizens have no moral obligation to respect constitutional principles, but rather that the constitution itself should not serve as a direct basis for criminal liability against any citizen.

Even if a constitution contains no provisions on citizens’ duties, the Legislative Yuan can still enact laws imposing various duties. The Legislative Yuan does not need an explicit constitutional authorization for every piece of legislation. For example, even if the constitution says nothing about the duty to pay taxes or perform military service, the Legislative Yuan can still pass tax laws and conscription laws requiring citizens to pay taxes and serve in the armed forces.

The same principle applies in many other areas. If a constitution does not mention banks, the Legislative Yuan can still enact banking laws to regulate them. If a constitution does not mention firefighters, the Legislative Yuan can still pass laws governing fire services. Likewise, even if a constitution does not specify any duties of citizens, the Legislative Yuan can still legislate to create such duties.

As long as legislation does not clearly conflict with the constitution, the Legislative Yuan should be free to enact whatever laws are necessary. Legislation does not require explicit constitutional authorization in every case. If every law required a specific constitutional basis, constitutions would become excessively long, and the legislative power of the Legislative Yuan would be unduly restricted.

2

What’s this a bot ? Who are you talking to ?

3

Why do you think I am a robot?

4

Meandering comment…it’s hard to follow.

Besides most of us aren’t citizens here on this forum, they won’t let us become citizens. Cart before the horse stuff .

You know during COVID we were given a duty to wear a mask and get vaccinated if we wanted to do certain things, citizen or not, constitution or not, it didn’t matter.

So the question you are asking is to me very esoteric. Governments oblige citizens and residents to pay their taxes on their income, that’s also a form of duty. Your kids are obliged to receive education, so on and so forth.

5

Very long gripe but you give us no examples… are we meant to go find these duties to have this conversation?

6

Give us a passport with 身分證 first then we will start talking about duties. :face_with_monocle:

7

Are these the duties you speak of:

Duty to Pay Taxes: Citizens are legally obligated to pay taxes according to the law to fund government functions and public services (Article 19).

Duty to Receive Education: Citizens have both the right and the duty to receive public education, as stipulated by law (Article 21).

Duty to Perform Military Service: Citizens have the sacred duty to perform military service in accordance with the law to defend the nation (Article 20).

8

Not all constitutions have this either.

9

He’s gone quiet already :face_with_monocle:

10

It is true that some constitutions, such as Australia’s, do not explicitly guarantee citizens’ rights. However, such cases are only rare exceptions.

11

If a citizen of the Republic of China refuses to pay taxes or perform military service, the government cannot punish him on the basis of the Constitution itself. A constitution cannot serve as a legal basis for criminal punishment. Only criminal law, tax law, or military service law can do that, not the Constitution. Therefore, there is no need for the Constitution to impose any duties on citizens. Even if the Constitution of the Republic of China contained no provision requiring citizens to pay taxes, the Legislative Yuan could still enact laws mandating taxation.

12

So, what’s the issue? Some constitutions have a preamble… this one has the 3 most important citizen’s duties.

Does having these duties in the constitution change anything? If not, there is no issue.

If yes, please let us know, and explain why this is an issue. So far you haven’t.

If having these duties within the consitution has no effect, as these duties depend of legislation. Having these duties within the constitution reminds the population that the nation feels that these are the 3 most important duties.

Maybe instead of removing these duties, they should have an amendment to add citizen’s duties to yield to pedestrians, stop at red-lights etc, or just the constitutional duty to obey traffic laws.

Would be fantastic if the headlines could read, “another citizen unconstitutionally hit the traffic/pedestrian island”.

13

To be fair, Taiwan lets nearly anyone become a ROC citizen if they agree to the naturalization deal.

The problem is: westerners don’t want to renounce their western citizenship.

Whereas China and UAE make it practically impossible for anyone to naturalize, even if you’re willing to renounce.

14

It’s not FAIR because Taiwanese don’t need to do that , it’s a very UNFAIR and unusual situation that possibly has no other parallel in the world.

Also they make exemptions for some country’s citizens on a fairly random basis. So it’s also kinda stupid.

15

Is the world supposed to be fair?

It’s also unfair that foreigners in any country cannot vote in the elections, despite living there, working there, and paying tax there.

Let the market decide.

If the unfair dual nationality law starts to hurt taiwan economically or socially, maybe it will get fixed. But looking at Japan, probably not.

16

I mean you specifically used the word fair, so I had to pushback on that strongly.

17

I meant, you are not being fair to forumosa readers.

You said taiwan doesn’t let us become citizens. That’s not true.

Whether taiwan’s naturalization policy fair to foreigners, that’s a different question. And the answer is no, taiwan is not being fair. But too bad.

18

Practically it’s the same result for most.

You make something so difficult it’s basically a prohibition on something.

So don’t use the word fair for an unfair policy.

19

It’s being fair to Taiwanese citizens.

I didn’t know a country must be equally fair to foreigners.

Canada and America sure as hell ain’t 100% fair to their foreigners.

20

I don’t understand your fair to Taiwanese citizens comment . Do you understand the word fairness because you seem to struggle with it’s usage?