On April 23, the legislature’s Internal Administration Committee reviewed draft amendments to the Act Governing Relations Between the Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例). It was preliminarily decided that all Chinese nationals married to Taiwanese should be granted work permits and that a NT$2 million (US$59,000) cap on the inheritance they could receive from their Taiwanese spouses should be scrapped. In addition, the waiting time for Chinese spouses to apply for citizenship is expected to be shortened from eight years to six or four years.
The legislative review marked the first time since the resumption of cross-strait interaction that the government has addressed the issue of the rights of Chinese spouses.
But even if the amendments are passed, they will not be enough to make treatment of spouses from China equal to treatment of spouses from other countries.
The rights of foreign spouses should naturally be protected, particularly with the legislature’s recent passage of the Act Governing Execution of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (公民與政治權利國際公約及經濟社會文化權利國際公約施行法) to implement the two UN covenants. The legislature also long ago signed and ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Policies that discriminate against Chinese spouses and treat them as “second-class immigrants” should not be allowed to continue, yet some legislators and politicians who put political ideology before human rights argue against measures to protect spouses from China. One legislator even said “it would be terrifying if the streets were full of the children of Chinese.”
This stems from misunderstandings. The fundamental problem is that these politicians frequently liken Chinese spouses to “outsiders” or even “enemies.” They fail to realize that these are the spouses and relatives of Taiwanese and as such are residents of Taiwan.
Chinese spouses should be treated as Taiwanese rather than as tourists or students temporarily in Taiwan. Chinese residents and the Taiwanese should stand together through thick and thin. The former have to pay taxes and abide by Taiwanese law like everyone else and should enjoy the same rights. Discrimination against Chinese spouses is also discrimination against the Taiwanese they married.
From a constitutional perspective, there may be some differences in the treatment of “foreigners,” but in principle, immigrants and other foreigners in Taiwan should enjoy the same constitutionally protected human rights as Taiwanese.
It goes without saying that many Chinese spouses have settled in Taiwan and have become Taiwanese. They can vote in presidential elections and are considered to live in “the free area of the Republic of China.” As civil servants, policymakers should be ashamed — they are discriminating against voters, and the electorate is their boss.
Policymakers are also to be criticized for their unfamiliarity with immigration research.
Many studies have shown that to help immigrants become part of a society and avoid isolation, it is necessary for the government to grant them work permits and social welfare, in addition to enforcing laws against discrimination.
In terms of the number of years required before an immigrant should be allowed to apply for citizenship, five years is often considered the longest acceptable waiting period. An excessively long wait can easily have a negative impact on the rights of immigrants.
As cross-strait marriages are a reality, we must treat these “new Taiwanese” equally and remember that they, like most Taiwanese, are immigrants from across the Taiwan Strait and deserve the same living standards and rights as everyone else.
Discrimination against Chinese immigrants will only fuel ethnic tension. Experience in other countries has shown that prohibition and discrimination are never effective. Facing the reality of immigration and protecting the rights of new immigrants to promote a tolerant and culturally diverse society are essential to national stability.
If the government continues to neglect the rights and interests of Chinese spouses and to treat them as second-class immigrants and third-class citizens — inferior both to Taiwanese and spouses from other countries — how will Taiwan be able to praise itself as a free and democratic country founded on human rights?
Bruce Liao is an assistant professor in the Department of Law at National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS