Taiwan lawmakers on Tuesday launched impeachment hearings against President Lai, placing impeachment hearings at the center of an intensifying political confrontation. Lawmakers said the process follows recent court rulings that struck down amendments affecting presidential accountability and legislative oversight. However, opposition parties now argue that the president must still answer questions through a formal impeachment process.
The controversy stems from amendments passed in 2024 that would have required the president to give regular state of the nation reports. Those changes also would have forced the president to accept live questioning inside the Legislative Yuan. However, Taiwan’s constitutional court later ruled that the provisions violated the separation of powers and invalidated them.
As a result, opposition lawmakers say impeachment hearings now provide the only remaining constitutional channel to hold the president accountable. Therefore, they initiated proceedings that would require Lai to testify and face direct questioning from legislators. Meanwhile, the government argues that lawmakers should focus on legislation rather than political confrontation.
The Legislative Yuan scheduled public hearings for Tuesday and Wednesday before moving into full committee reviews next week. Afterward, the lead sponsor of the impeachment motion will present detailed charges. Lai will then receive fifteen minutes to respond before lawmakers begin questioning.
Another review session will take place in May, which will lead into a final impeachment vote on May 19. If lawmakers approve the motion, the case would advance to the Constitutional Court for further consideration. Therefore, the hearings mark a crucial moment for Taiwan’s democratic institutions.
During Tuesday’s opening session, Kuomintang legislator Hsu Chiao-hsin accused Lai of abusing presidential authority and damaging constitutional balance. She argued that impeachment hearings provide a legal record of what she described as serious misconduct. Meanwhile, party colleague Lin Te-fu rejected Lai’s criticism that the process wastes time.
Lin said the president undermined the constitution by blocking laws that passed full legislative review with the support of Premier Cho Jung-tai. He also claimed that such actions weakened legislative authority and eroded democratic norms. Therefore, he said lawmakers must press forward with the impeachment effort.
Taiwan People’s Party legislator Liu Shu-pin also backed the proceedings, saying Lai has governed in an arbitrary and self directed manner. She said the president has weakened both the legislature and the judiciary since taking office. Consequently, she framed impeachment hearings as a defense of constitutional accountability rather than partisan conflict.
However, the Presidential Office responded cautiously while defending Lai’s leadership. Spokesperson Karen Kuo said the administration respects the legal right of lawmakers to pursue impeachment. Nevertheless, she urged the legislature to prioritize passage of the general budget and a special national defense spending plan.
Budget delays have stalled government programs and defense modernization efforts during a period of growing regional security risks. Therefore, the administration argues that lawmakers should move quickly to restore financial stability and military readiness. Yet opposition parties insist that constitutional oversight remains their immediate responsibility.
Political analysts say the impeachment process could deepen partisan divisions ahead of important policy decisions. At the same time, they note that impeachment hearings may clarify limits on presidential power after the court ruling. Therefore, the outcome could shape Taiwan’s democratic governance for years.
As the hearings continue, both sides will likely intensify public messaging and legal preparation. Ultimately, the May vote will determine whether President Lai faces a formal constitutional trial. For now, impeachment hearings have placed Taiwan’s political system under unprecedented scrutiny.
