Greed is often a secondary motivation for many financial crimes. Legal loopholes, lax law enforcement and administrative inaction appear to be the primary culprits behind the reoccurrence of such crimes. The question is how much more money must be stolen and how many more convicts must abscond from Taiwan before these problems can be fixed and such situations avoided?
Two days ago, three fund managers at First Securities Investment Trust Corp (First SITC) were found to have irregularly handled assets under their management last year by colluding with Prescope Technologies Co, which operates in the high-tech industry and trades its shares on the nation’s over-the-counter market. Their illegal activities have gained them about NT$4 million (US$134,830) in kickbacks, but caused a loss of more than NT$20 million in mutual funds under their management.
The latest issue is reminiscent of another incidence of asset mishandling by a fund manager at ING Securities Investment and Trust Co (ING SITC), which was uncovered late last year. In that case, former ING SITC vice president Sam Hsieh (謝青良) and his peers at other trading houses made personal profits by manipulating the share prices of Ablerex Electronics Co, a power supply equipment supplier, via dummy accounts. Their actions caused more than NT$210 million in losses to the government-run Labor Insurance, Labor Pension and Public Service Pension funds in 2010, for which ING SITC was entrusted by the government with securities investment.
Meanwhile, earlier last week, Wan Chung (萬眾) became another fugitive reportedly having fled to China before he was to begin serving a three-and-a-half-year prison term in Taiwan.
Wan was allegedly extending high-interest loans to companies and individuals who had been refused credit at normal banks. Between 1998 and 2001, he was also allegedly involved in coercion, illegal debt-collecting and violations of the Organized Crime Prevention Act (組織犯罪防制條例).
Prior to his absconding, several convicts of financial crimes went on the run, the most recent case being former independent lawmaker Lo Fu-chu (羅福助), who did not report to prosecutors in April last year to begin serving a four-year jail term for forgery, stock manipulation and money laundering. He has since gone missing and is supposedly hiding in China.
The financial and judicial authorities responded to the news by saying they would look into the issue and take necessary measures to stop them recurring. For instance, the Financial Supervisory Commission said on Friday that it would mete out penalties and fines to First SITC and its three managers if the fraud allegations proved true, while the Ministry of Justice admitted there are blind spots in the monitoring system of convicts. It added that it was drafting measures to plug the loophole in the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法). However, does that not sound all too familiar?
No one would oppose the authorities’ efforts to fight financial crime and keep such convicts where they should be. However, the penalties that authorities have implemented have not proved stringent enough to prevent potential frauds, and the government’s efforts to fix the legal loopholes are too slow to ensure enforcement of the law. The same excuses heard repeatedly from the government will not win the public’s trust. People continue to see financial crimes occurring and high-profile convicts absconding.
Perhaps it is not just the financial and judicial authorities that are incapable of dealing with financial crimes, but also the Legislative Yuan.
One has to wonder if the nation’s lawmakers are too short-sighted to recognize the impact of such illegal activities on the economy, or whether they are just too lazy to do anything to deal with the problem. Is our government so spineless that these wrongdoings must continue? Action is needed, not more talking.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under