The decision by newly-installed KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou to call for a new election of the party's Central Standing Committee (CSC) signals yet another evolutionary change that should be welcomed by all.

This move was undertaken after reports confirmed widespread gift-giving by CSC candidates in last week's election, prompting widespread condemnation after Ma had promised to reform the party.

The decision to make CSC members give up their seats and hold a new election was a wise move that will hopefully help reverse decades of cronyism within the party. It also marks another bold step away from the party's traditional Soviet-inspired organization.

Some people believe the KMT is too old and entrenched to change its ways. But over the century of its existence, the KMT has changed and evolved many times as the party has seen its fortunes rise and fall.

The KMT's historic defeat in the 2000 presidential election, which saw the party ejected from power for the first time since retreating to Taiwan in 1949, marked a major turning point that helped the party move away from its authoritarian past.

After the party regained power with Ma Ying-jeou's victory in the presidential election and by winning a parliamentary majority in 2008, Ma vowed to move reforms into high gear.

But this is far from the first time that the KMT has been faced with the challenge of re-inventing itself to survive.

Starting off as a small group demanding the overthrow of China's Qing Dynasty, the KMT, at the time called the Tongmenhui, or Revolutionary Alliance, first gained political power in southern China's Guangdong province after the 1911 --inhai (Hsin Hai) Revolution that toppled the Qing.

The KMT's founder, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, realized he would need to establish stronger discipline within his party if he could ever be able to defeat the warlord armies that dominated most of China in the chaotic period following the Qing's demise.

Desperate for aid and assistance, Dr. Sun reluctantly agreed to a Soviet offer of help to his fledgling government in exchange for admitting Chinese Communist Party members into the KMT's ranks in their capacity as “individuals.”

The communists capitalized on positions granted to them in the KMT to expand their own organization at the KMT's expense.

Moscow sent advisers to Guangzhou, who helped Dr. Sun reorganize the KMT into the structure that largely remains the same today.

Invented by Vladimir Lenin, the structure of “democratic centralism” works like this: every four years, party members elect about 1,500 delegates to a party congress. When the congress is convened, the 1,500 or so delegates elect 210 members of the Central Committee and another 105 alternate members. Since the Central Committee is too large to meet regularly, the 210 Central Committee members elect several dozen members of the elite CSC.

The CSC has traditionally met once a week to set important policies, which are then carried out by members at all levels of government.

At present, the CSC has a total of 39 members, including five appointed directly by the chairman, two chosen by young members and the remainder, along with 14 alternates, elected among Central Committee members.

While the KMT long ago parted ways with its Soviet advisers and fought a civil war against the Chinese communists, it has retained the Leninist system of “democratic centralism” in its party structure.

Ironically, the opposition Democratic Progressive Party copied the KMT's structure after it was founded in 1986.

When Taiwan was still under one-party authoritarian rule, the CSC was a tremendously powerful body whose members formed a political elite. But following democratization and competition among rival parties, the CSC has become far less powerful.

Today, the KMT's caucus in the Legislative Yuan and the president, who are directly elected by the people, are far more powerful than the CSC.

The KMT's chairman is also now directly elected by members, making the chairman more legitimate and powerful.

Indeed, the CSC has largely been relegated to listening to working reports at its weekly meetings and few important decisions get made there.

The CSC's main function today is to approve slates of candidates to run in various elections, although these lists are often determined through primaries and opinion polls instead of backroom negotiations.

The KMT is merely a private organization and internal elections are not subject to stringent laws governing vote-buying for public office.

However, the KMT would be wise to continue reforming its internal structure to move away from “democratic centralism.”

As a democratic party existing in a system of competing parties, the KMT long ago ceased being the source of political power.

That is why the KMT should continue moving away from “democratic centralism” so that it can transform itself into a functional election machine.