Print

Mail

wiki links

Letter: Legal analysis flawed

In response to Roger Lin's letter to the editor (Letters, Nov. 10, page 8), I must say that as an attorney, I find it fascinating to read "legal" analyses by lay people. Lin's letter attempts to provide a "legal" analysis of why Taiwan is not an independent nation. However, his legal reasoning is just plain comical. Lin, without regard to the clear and unambiguous terms of the Montevideo Convention, argues that it does not apply. Like an amateur lawyer, Lin chooses to ignore clear and plain language not favorable to his argument, so that he can arrive at his predetermined conclusion.

Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention states that, "[t]he state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states."

In the case of Taiwan, each of these four elements are met. First, Taiwan has a permanent population. Second, Taiwan is situated in a defined territory. Indeed, Taiwan is an island, so the boundaries of its territory could not be clearer. Third, it clearly has a government. Fourth, Taiwan has the capacity to and does enter into relations with other states.

Lin apparently concedes that Taiwan meets three of the four elements and only argues that Taiwan does not meet the element for defined territory. What Lin fails to understand is that the term "defined territory" only relates to geographical boundaries.

All the arguments Lin and like-minded people make about who gave what to whom and on what day are meaningless. This is because their arguments presuppose that Taiwan had to have a certain level of sovereignty prior to becoming an independent nation. This is false based upon their own use of the Montevideo Convention. Indeed, the first sentence of Article 3 of the Montevideo Contentions explicitly states that "[t]he political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states." Accordingly, all Taiwan needs to have and does have is a geographically defined territory. Therefore, using their own legal premises and applying the true facts to the elements contained therein, Taiwan is an independent nation.

It appears that Lin has skewed his argument the way he has because he wants to be considered a de facto US citizen. Indeed, the title of his letter is "Taiwan is US territory." While this form of immigration is quite unique, the only sure way to determine if he is indeed correct is to have Lin put his money where his mouth is. If Lin is so sure that he is correct, he should file a complaint in any US District Court asserting his rights to protection under the US Constitution. Failing to do that, Lin and all like-minded people should keep their ludicrous theories to themselves as they clearly have no place in the reality Taiwan currently exists in.

Walter Chung
Taipei

This story has been viewed 1619 times.