Law a humanitarian crisis
The current situation regarding naturalization and loss of nationality in Taiwan is very clear, both according to the law and in practice: Non-nationals wishing to acquire Taiwanese nationality are required to first renounce their current nationality (Enforcement Rules of the Nationality Act, Article 8), while current nationals who acquire a foreign nationality may — but are not required to — apply to renounce their Taiwanese nationality (Nationality Act, Article 11).
In practice, the vast majority of nationals here are unaware of this discrepancy in the Nationality Act, because for the most part, Taiwanese nationals know that they can be dual nationals without losing Taiwanese nationality. However, they should be very concerned.
The act goes against the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. The 1961 convention requires that loss of nationality should be conditional upon the prior possession of another nationality. However, Taiwan’s act requires the certificate of stateless status to be submitted with the application for naturalization: A person must become stateless without prior possession of — or assurance of acquiring — another nationality.
This results in the horrible situation where a spouse who divorces during the naturalization process after having already renounced their original nationality is stuck in Taiwan as a stateless person. This is exactly what the UN Convention seeks to prevent, as people are left without the protection of any government.
There are many thousands who are forced to remain in the nation, unable to return to their country of origin; many are not even able to reunite with their families or children. Taiwan receives neither economic nor social benefits from these people and yet it is Taiwan’s own nationality law that exacerbates the problem and continues to cause undue harm and suffering.
Further, the law encourages foreigners to make decisions based on the quality of their country of origin, rather than their loyalty to Taiwan. US and European nationals who might want Taiwanese nationality refuse to apply because the price they pay is simply too high, while foreigners from less economically and socially developed countries are happy to make the switch.
According to government figures, since 1982 fewer than 30 nationals from the US and western Europe have acquired Taiwanese nationality, while more than 110,000 individuals from Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Myanmar and Cambodia have renounced their nationalities to become Taiwanese.
Is this the system the nation wants? One where people choose nationality based on economic benefits, rather than loyalty to Taiwan?
Here is a proposal for amending the act: Repeal Article 9. Allow other countries to determine when and if nationality should be revoked based on the acquisition of Taiwanese nationality, the same way Taiwan protects its own nationals in Article 11. Thousands of stateless people remain stranded in Taiwan today as a result of Article 9.
Let us call on the government to repeal Article 9 and end this humanitarian crisis immediately.
Edward Greve,
New Taipei City
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS