President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has attempted to discredit Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) by trying to force him to resign after claims that he engaged in improper lobbying surfaced.
Despite the disconcerting feeling resulting from Ma’s direct power struggle, the role of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Special Investigation Division (SID), which has acted like the notorious Ming Dynasty secret police, is even more frightening.
As the situation develops, the veil covering the SID’s secret wiretapping is being lifted bit by bit. There are three reasons why this disgraceful practice is so vicious:
First, wiretapping is rampant. According to Judicial Yuan statistics, district courts across the nation issue more than 15,000 “surveillance warrants” per year. This number is similar to that of the US, has a population about 13.5 times larger than Taiwan’s. Is this a result of the lack of surveillance equipment and personnel in the US or excessive surveillance practices in Taiwan?
During a recent legislative question-and-answer session, Prosecutor-General Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) said that the number of telephone wiretaps were about 60,000, 74,000, 92,000, 99,000 and 102,000 for each of the years between 2008 and last year respectively. Since Ma was elected president more than five years ago, the number of wiretaps has increased by 70 percent. If this is not excessive wiretapping, then what is?
Second, a number of wiretaps are illegal. The Communication Security and Surveillance Act (通訊保障及監察法) states that after an investigation involving wiretapping ends, the must inform the subject about the practice in a written notice within seven days, unless the notification could violate the purpose of an investigation.
The SID claims that it legally wiretapped Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office Prosecutor Lin Shiow-tao (林秀濤) because of her alleged involvement in the improper lobbying case between July 13 and Sept. 5. She should have received a notice about the wiretapping no later than Sept. 12. The problem is that if the media had not asked her to confirm the wiretapping on Wednesday last week, she would not have known that she had been under surveillance since she did not receive a notification. This suggests that the SID did not notify her after the wiretapping ended. If this is not illegal wiretapping, then what is?
Third, the SID leaked information. Before Lin and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) received a notice from the court about being wiretapped, the division had already made a big announcement, releasing the transcripts of wiretapped conversations between Ker and Wang to the media. It seems that the SID likes to share the progress of its investigation with the public. If this is not leaking information, then what is?
Wiretapping could maybe be considered a “necessary evil” if used to investigate criminal and improper activities. However, if the SID wiretaps people in a blind search for evidence, it must use excuses to cover up its illegal action.
A prosecutor and the DPP caucus whip were wiretapped for a long time. Some Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators even joke about this by asking each other: “Have you been wiretapped lately?” If this is not a White Terror-era in a state run by the secret police, then what is?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US