When the Control Yuan announced the impeachment of National Security Bureau officials for negligence after some of their subordinates absconded with government funds, it once again exposed the lack of appropriate legislative supervision over the intelligence organizations.
Intelligence is an important tool in the preservation of the nation's survival and interests, but owing to its secretive and unique modus operandi, if intelligence work is carried out inappropriately, the public's human rights will be affected. Because of this, Taiwan's intelligence organization really should accept supervision from legislative organizations, and reduce illegal activities.
Democratic countries mainly divide their supervision of intelligence agencies into three categories: executive, internal and legislative. Executive supervision is conducted from departments positioned above the intelligence agencies, such as the US president's Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB) which operates directly under the president, and the UK's Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), under the Cabinet.
In the UK, committee chairs are filled by senior officials of the Cabinet Office, and are directly responsible to the prime minister. Members include senior-level officials from the foreign affairs, defense, trade and industry, and finance ministries, as well as the heads of the three main intelligence agencies.
Each intelligence organization basically supervises itself. In the US, for example, every intelligence organization designates an internal "supervisor" that works directly under the agency head. These supervisors perform inspections, supervision and auditing, seeking to prevent abuses.
The CIA is unique because it is the only US intelligence agency where the internal supervisor is appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. By law, this internal supervisor must report directly to the president's IOB. In addition, because the numerous intelligence organizations under the US Defense Department, the post of assistant to the secretary of defense for intelligence oversight is set up directly under the secretary.
The UK's Cabinet system uses a permanent undersecretaries committee composed of undersecretaries from each of the different intelligence agencies. The committee operates under the guidance of the JIC, integrating and inspecting the activities of the various intelligence agencies. The UK's intelligence agencies also designate their own supervisors and appraisal committees.
As for the most important supervisory body in the US -- the Congress -- the Select Committee on Intelligence bears the main responsibility for supervising intelligence agencies. Other legislative committees can also supervise intelligence work related to their professional domains.
As for the numerous grey areas of intelligence and counter-intelligence work -- such as the US State Department's numerous "secret operations" -- the foreign and international relations committees of the Congress can de-mand that the department submit a secret operations report.
In the UK, the Intelligence and Security Committee is set up in accordance with the Intelligence Services Act. The committee is formed by members of both the houses of Parliament. Nine of the committee members are appointed by the prime minister. These committees' main functions are to supervise the operations, budgets and administrative matters of the three intelligence departments, the Security Service, Secret Intelligence Service and Government Communications Headquarters.
Of course, with regard to confidential intelligence matters, legislators should have the responsibility of keeping things secret. In the US, for example, Congressional committee members and staffers are not allowed to leak sensitive or confidential information to the outside. In addition, the principle of having the lowest possible number of people present at confidential meetings should be observed, in order to reduce, as much as possible, the participation of unnecessary people.
Although the US does not consider the leaking of secrets by members of Congress a criminal act, those who have leaked secrets without authorization may, following a vote, be expelled from their committees -- or even from Congress.
This sort of congressional self-regulation is extremely deserving of consideration by the Legislative Yuan.
Because intelligence organizations enjoy significant special funding, if they aren't subject to systematic regulations, the problem of the "tail wagging the dog" could easily occur. Because FBI founder J. Edgar Hoover controlled a vast amount of information regarding politicians' private lives, he was able to force the executive branch to do his bidding. For this reason, beginning in the 1980s, the US executive branch has constantly strengthened supervision of intelligence agencies. Perhaps this too, can serve as a useful reference for Taiwan.
Taiwan's intelligence and counter-intelligence regulations are rather chaotic. Scattered about in various laws, these regulations lack an integrated basis. Thus, as our nation becomes a mature democracy, constructing an intelligence supervisory mechanism is the legislature's unshirkable responsibility.
Lee Wen-chung is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Scudder Smith
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath