At an event held at the Presidential Office for foreign spouses last week, President Chen Shui-bian (
We can only admire these enlightening words, which once again demonstrate the diversity and openness of Chen's views on human rights.
But for all people fighting for human rights, the talk given soon after Chen's speech by the minister of the interior about establishing an immigration office to safeguard immigrant rights was laughable.
In reality, not only will the office not be helpful in protecting the rights of foreign spouses, but it may very well have a negative effect. Myself and other representatives of immigrant rights groups have on numerous occasions discussed the new Immigration Law (
The responses we received have revealed that officials view immigrants as potential criminals, using phrases like the "natural character of Taiwanese citizens" and the "burden on the country" in their arguments.
What's worse, during discussions of the chapter about the protection of immigrants' rights, the members of the ministry and other officials unabashedly expressed exclusionary attitudes.
They repeatedly told immigrant rights organizations that "We [the future immigration office] should only be responsible for `investigation.'"
"Not even the human rights of Taiwanese are protected, so why should those of foreign spouses be protected?" they asked.
With this kind of attitude, what chance do we have of effectively protecting immigrant rights, as Chen talked about?
The proposed immigration office is only an agency, while the real key to safeguarding human rights lies in the content of the law that it will implement -- the Immigration Law.
Not only does the Immigration Law not contain a single word about protecting immigrants' human rights, but it also empowers the foreign affairs police to use completely inappropriate procedures, disregard the principle of proportionality and ignore family relations in dealing with married immigrants.
Furthermore, not only does the Cabinet's draft amendment not resolve this problem, but it strengthens the powers of the original law's provisions to arrest, conduct visitations, question and impose judicial sanctions.
What does any of this have to do with protecting human rights?
Will domestic violence against foreign spouses drop after the immigration office opens? Will politicians and the media stop smearing them? When doing business or applying for jobs, will they no longer face discrimination?
Some may assume that inviting new immigrants to sing at the Presidential Office is equivalent to defending human rights, but it is not.
The real problem is that the law and the Cabinet's revisions are completely unconcerned with human rights.
If we really want to protect immigrants from being victimized, it will take more than just words from the president.
We need to establish explicit protections against discrimination and exploitation from the public and private sectors, and the immigration office must actively protect immigrants from abuse.
A comprehensive human rights amendment to the Immigration Law is needed. Otherwise the establishment of a special agency to manage immigrants simply makes a mockery of Chen's grand speech.
Bruce Liao is an assistant professor of law at Soochow University.
Translated by Marc Langer
On Sept. 27, 2002, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (East Timor) joined the UN to become its 191st member. Since then, two other nations have joined, Montenegro on June 28, 2006, and South Sudan on July 14, 2011. The combined total of the populations of these three nations is just more than half that of Taiwan’s 23.7 million people. East Timor has 1.3 million, Montenegro has slightly more than half a million and South Sudan has 10.9 million. They all are members of the UN, yet much more populous Taiwan is denied membership. Of the three, East Timor, as a Southeast Asian
Chinese strongman Xi Jinping (習近平) hasn’t had a very good spring, either economically or politically. Not that long ago, he seemed to be riding high. The PRC economy had been on a long winning streak of more than six percent annual growth, catapulting the world’s most populous nation into the second-largest power, behind only the United States. Hundreds of millions had been brought out of poverty. Beijing’s military too had emerged as the most powerful in Asia, lagging only behind the US, the long-time leader on the global stage. One can attribute much of the recent downturn to the international economic
Taiwan has for decades singlehandedly borne the brunt of a revanchist, ultra-nationalist China — until now. Ever since Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had the temerity to call for a transparent, international investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been turning the screws on Canberra. This has included unleashing aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomats to intimidate Australian policymakers, enacting punitive tariffs on its exports, and threatening an embargo on Chinese tourists and students to the nation. A tense situation became more serious on June 19 after Morrison revealed that a “sophisticated state-based actor” — read: China — had launched a
Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) is to be Taiwan’s next representative to the US. Hsiao is well versed in international affairs and Taiwan-US relations. In her days as a student in the US, she was a member of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) and served as chief executive of the Democratic Progressive Party’s US mission. She is familiar with a broad spectrum of Taiwanese affairs in the US. FAPA hopes that Hsiao, after taking up her new post, would continue to deepen and normalize relations between Taiwan and the US, and that she would try to get a free-trade agreement