As of the evening of the 13th, the Central Election Commission of the Republic of China (Taiwan) stated that a total of 54 recall cases had been submitted by the deadline at 5 p.m. Among them, 51 cases were aimed at legislators, 1 case targeted the recall of a mayor, and 2 cases involved the recall of city councilors.
On the 13th, recall campaigners from the blue camp went to the Central Election Commission to submit the first-stage recall petition for independent legislator Chen Chaoming in the first district of Miaoli and Kuomintang legislator Qiu Zhenjun in the second district. The lead initiator of the recall against Qiu Zhenjun had previously withdrawn temporarily, and noted author and National Literary Award winner Lee Qiao replaced them as the lead initiator. Green camp recall campaigners also visited the Central Election Commission and submitted proposed recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Huang Jie and Xu Zhijie.
According to the law on the recall of public officials in the Republic of China, officials who have been in office for less than one year cannot be recalled. The 11th Legislative Yuan’s one-year anniversary of inauguration on February 1st marked the official start of a nationwide wave of recalls initiated by civic groups.
Chen Chaojian, Vice Chairman of the Central Election Commission of the Republic of China, stated that as of 5 p.m. on the 13th, the Commission had received a total of 54 recall case submissions, with 51 cases targeting legislators, 1 case targeting the recall of a mayor, and 2 cases concerning the recall of city councilors. He mentioned that since the recall cases had entered the processing phase, they would be handled according to the law without any comments or responses being provided.
On the 11th, the Legislative Yuan of the Republic of China rejected a reconsideration motion by the Executive Yuan regarding amendments to the Recall and Election Law. According to media reports, Kuomintang legislator Weng Xiaoling stated that under the new recall law, during the second stage of official petition collection, individuals should be required to present their identification card to prevent unfair competition during the petition process.
The Central Election Commission of the Republic of China stated through a written statement on the 11th that according to Article 131 of the Recall and Election Law, elections that have issued official notices before the implementation of amendments to the law, or where recall petitions have already been submitted to the competent election commission, will still follow the pre-amendment regulations. Therefore, for recall proposals under the old law, subsequent stages such as petition collection and voting will also adhere to the old law; conversely, for recall proposals submitted under the new law, all stages will be governed by the new law. Regarding the timing of signing recall proposal petitions as a form of expression of intent, it is not within the scope of election authorities to interfere, as per the interpretation of the Ministry of the Interior, the legal authority, and past judicial practices.
The Central Election Commission further mentioned that according to Article 75, paragraph 1 of the Recall and Election Law, officials who have been in office for less than one year cannot be recalled. Therefore, the lead initiator of a recall proposal should submit the recall petition and related documents to the election commission only after the official has completed one year in office. As for the duration of signatories on the list of recall initiators, there is no stipulated period in the law, it is not listed as a reason for removal, and there is no additional necessary restriction.
Moreover, the Taipei High Administrative Court ruled on the recall case of former Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu under the Recall and Election Law, clarifying that the provision in Article 75, paragraph 1 of the law specifying “not subject to recall” refers to officials who have been in office for less than one year, prohibiting the submission of recall proposals. The initiation of recall activities formed by mutual awareness of support for a recall before the proposal is made essentially serves as a means of expressing opinions, embodying principles of freedom of speech, and should be protected by the constitution.