The recent kidnapping of a China-based Taiwanese businessman in Dongguan, Guangdong Province, who was later released after a ransom was paid, provides another example of how Chinese and Taiwanese criminals work together to commit crime across the Taiwan Strait.
Cross-strait exchanges have grown substantially in business and other areas compared to 10 years ago. Along with this, crime has seen a dramatic increase in both amount and complexity. However, cooperation between Chinese and Taiwanese law enforcement agencies is limited. We need a mechanism that enables authorities to work together to deter Chinese and Taiwanese criminals from colluding with each other.
The problem is that, compared with other cross-strait affairs, the extent of exchange and cooperation between public security organizations is conservative and insufficient. Taiwanese police officers are still prohibited by law from travelling to China. Visits to family members there are also strictly regulated. Exchanges only happen at an academic level or through private organizations. As a result, efforts to stamp out crime cannot match criminal cross-strait collaboration, leaving it a blind spot for public security.
Taiwan's law enforcement agencies find it difficult to continue with investigations once they realize that cases are related to China. Some grassroots police officers told me that cases usually come to a halt if their leads point to China. That's what happened in a case last year in which more than 400 day-care centers in central and southern Taiwan were blackmailed into sending money to a Chinese bank in Kunming, Yunnan Province.
Communications are directed through the crime detection section of the Criminal Investigation Bureau, a method that can be used but not talked about. So, except for major cases or those handled by the bureau, cooperation with Chinese agencies is unlikely.
Predictably, due to the lack of official means of cooperation and communication with China, law enforcement agencies will not be able to stop cross-strait crimes, which are increasing persistently in both quantity and complexity. If the public security authorities on both sides fail to speed up cooperation, they will also miss opportunities to take preemptive measures and prevent crime, thus making cross-strait collaboration a gold mine for criminal groups.
The problem is, despite progress in cross-strait cooperation on crime issues, advances in establishing cooperation mechanisms are very limited under current political structures. The biggest obstacle is politics. Reality demands law enforcement agencies on both sides work together, yet they cannot encourage exchanges or cooperate in investigations due to political factors.
Based on my experience, when concrete attempts at cooperation take place, a flood of petty political maneuvering also gets underway, creating difficulties for police and embarrassment for all. In other words, during a joint effort to deter crime, political factors often weigh so heavily upon the process that professional efforts to investigate crimes are impaired.
Both Beijing and Taipei are responsible for enabling each other's law enforcement agencies to work together to tackle crime. If the two governments can not stop the corrupting influence of politics on law enforcement, further major criminal activity will be the result. When this happens, blaming each other will be useless to investigations.
Yang Yung-nane is a professor and director of the department of administrative management at Central Police University.
Translated by Jennie Shih
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs