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
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