On July 14, former Government Information Office (GIO) official Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英), who was removed from his post in 2009 after writing political commentary on Web sites that referred to Taiwanese as “descendants of Japanese pirates,” “rednecks” and “country bumpkins,” met the legal age necessary for retirement from the Taiwan Provincial Government, where he was employed as foreign affairs secretary in February.
As a result, Kuo is set to collect a monthly pension of NT$60,000 (US$2,000) funded by taxes paid by the rednecks and country bumpkins he had so much to say about in 2009.
However, in response to this, the Ministry of Civil Service said that Kuo’s retirement would not affect ongoing investigations into his employment and that he would not receive his monthly pension before the ministry formally appraises his case. The ministry also said that if the Taiwan Provincial Government confirms that Kuo was legally employed, he would be paid back all the pension payments he is entitled to.
However, the procedures used by the Taiwan Provincial Government when employing Kuo were illegal. Putting aside the question of whether Minister Without Portfolio Lin Jung-tzer (林政則), who also oversees the Taiwan Provincial Government and who oversaw Kuo’s appointment, is guilty of influence peddling in hiring Kuo — just looking at how the Taiwan Provincial Government acted against the Administrative Procedure Act (行政程序法) in its hiring of Kuo — it is obvious that steps can be taken to stop Kuo from receiving his pension and to recoup the salary Kuo received as a civil servant in the Taiwan Provincial Government.
Article 7.1 of the act, which pertains to the principles that administrative acts should follow, says: “The method adopted must be helpful to the achievement of the objectives thereof.”
The employment of officials by governmental organizations is a form of “administrative act.” The administrative procedures used in employing officials by government organizations — as well as letting officials retain their position without pay — should take into account whether such procedures are beneficial to furthering employment within government organizations.
Given this, the Taiwan Provincial Government’s hiring of Kuo, who was almost at retirement age when he was hired, was of no help in meeting this administrative goal and is therefore in breach of the Administrative Procedure Act.
Even worse, an investigation carried out by members of the Control Yuan showed that the provisions for recruitment by the Taiwan Provincial Government, which are equivalent to an administrative order, have clear regulations that require an interview to be held when employing somebody. However, when hiring Kuo, the Taiwan Provincial Government did not carry out any interview. Therefore, in terms of procedure, Kuo’s employment had serious defects that ran in contradiction to an administrative order.
In light of this, Kuo’s employment by the Taiwan Provincial Government meets the criteria of Article 111 of the Administrative Procedure Act, which relates to “an administrative disposition with other material and apparent defects,” and as such, Kuo’s employment should be viewed as invalid.
In simple terms, given that Kuo’s hiring by the Taiwan Provincial Government was invalid from start to finish, the national government should not allow him to collect any monthly pension lest it too becomes guilty of influence peddling.
Lastly, the salary Kuo received while working illegally should be retrieved in accordance with the law to protect the rights and interests of taxpayers.
Huang Di-ying is a lawyer.
Translated by Drew Cameron
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS