Rule of law in Taiwan
I live in a building complex in Taichung County and recently it was time to renew the contracts for the service providers and building management company. Several board members wanted to change some providers because of dissatisfaction with the quality of service provided. The board agreed to review all the contracts and send out requests for bids for the providers the board was uncertain it wanted to renew. One of these was the building management company itself.
The service providers were surveyed and votes taken. The board initially agreed on gardening and cleaning, soil and garbage removal, swimming pool guard and recycling providers without argument. It was, however, unable to come to an agreement on a provider for elevator repair services and building management services.
There was a vote and a new elevator services provider selected. A vote was also supposed to be taken to select a building management company. Some board members walked out after realizing the current firm was going to lose, but a quorum for the meeting remained and a new management company was voted in.
The next day a representative from the building management company presented contracts to the board chairman. These named the old elevator services provider and the old building management company as selected providers despite the fact that they had lost the vote at the previous night’s election. The building management company contends these contracts are valid even though their representative was well aware of the outcome of the board’s vote.
The members of the board who voted to change providers submitted the minutes of the June 23 meeting to the building management company to be posted, but it refused. Board members then put copies of the meeting results into residents’ mailboxes. As recorded by security cameras, the building manager and the board chairman removed these announcements by sticking their hands in residents’ mailboxes. We do not know what else they removed because apparently the items were shredded. The police were called and shown the evidence, but we had to practically beg them to even write down the details and it is possible they didn’t bother to file a police report.
The next evening, the board members who voted for a change again attempted to distribute the meeting results (addressed and in envelopes). The next morning (as recorded by the building security cameras), a resident who works for the building management company removed 175 pieces of mail and put them in a plastic bag as building security guards watched. The bag was in the hands of the building manager when one of our residents encountered him. It contained a number of pieces of personal mail along with the items the board members had placed in the mailboxes. The police were called again. Complaints were filed and the police placed an announcement — though only after strong encouragement — indicating that complaints could be filed against the resident in question if people living in the building came to the police station.
At this time, the building management company remains unchanged. Many residents are fearful and feel personally unsafe. The building manager and the security guards who participated in or watched this happen are still on staff. Personally, I do not feel supported by the police and the rule of law and am also concerned for the safety of my family.
Tom Carroll
Wurih Township,
Taichung County
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS