Taiwan’s Human Rights Review Flags Constitutional Court Gridlock
Taiwan’s national human rights review committee is warning about the Constitutional Court’s limited capacity due to persistent vacancies.
Why it matters: The court's operational deadlock threatens legal certainty and effective human rights enforcement in Taiwan. Scholars and practitioners tracking judicial governance and constitutional law will note the implications for checks and balances under political gridlock.
- The Constitutional Court has only 8 of 15 justices, below the legal quorum for rulings.
- Legislative changes in December 2024 raised quorum and voting requirements, effectively paralyzing the court.
- Presidential nominees to fill vacancies were twice rejected by the Legislative Yuan.
- A December 2025 ruling allowed the court to resume operations, but most vacancies remain.
The National Human Rights Review Committee has publicly expressed concern about the persistent operational crisis at Taiwan’s Constitutional Court. The warning highlights risks for legal certainty and human rights enforcement stemming from continued judicial vacancies and legislative gridlock.
- Only eight justices currently sit on the bench—far short of the statutory 15-member court and below the new 10-member quorum requirement introduced in late 2024.
- When seven justices’ terms ended on October 31, 2024, the Legislative Yuan raised the quorum for court deliberations to 10 and required nine votes to declare a law unconstitutional—a move seen by some as consistent with international legal norms but criticized by others as an undue restriction.
- President Lai Ching-te's efforts to address the shortfall saw two nomination lists, in December 2024 and July 2025, both rejected by the Legislative Yuan, leaving the appointments in limbo. Pan Men-an, Presidential Office Secretary-General, summed up executive frustration: “Should we keep submitting nominees only for them to be rejected again?”
- The court was paralyzed for over a year until December 19, 2025, when five sitting justices ruled the amendments unconstitutional, allowing the court to resume operations without the higher quorum threshold. Three dissenting justices contended the court lacked authority to rule with so few members. Some legal experts, such as Liao Yuan-hao (National Chengchi University), maintain that the higher quorum aligns with global standards.
While the court is again operational, the review committee remains concerned that ongoing vacancies and political stalemates could compromise judicial effectiveness and Taiwan's constitutional order.
By the numbers:
- 15 — statutory number of Constitutional Court justices
- 8 — current sitting justices
- 2 — rejected nomination lists for new justices since December 2024
Yes, but: The Legislative Yuan argues that a 10-member quorum is consistent with international standards, according to Liao Yuan-hao, and some justices believe rulings with fewer members lack legitimacy.