An alleged insider-trading case against OBI Pharma Inc has been in the news for weeks and is still far from being finalized, with TV talk shows and news reports taking advantage of the scandal to challenge the vested interests in the local biotech industry and in the nation’s political economy.
It is ironic that this allegation, and with it a call for the resignation of Academia Sinica President Wong Chi-huey (翁啟惠), comes at a time when president-elect Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government is touting the development of biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry as the cornerstone of economic growth.
Conspiracy theories abound, particularly among the ranks of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), who see the OBI case as an perfect display of greed and corruption involving certain biotech investors, Tsai and her family.
These KMT members — who orchestrated an attempt to discredit Tsai over the Yu Chang Biologics Co investment case during her presidential campaign in 2012 — think that as long as they continue their mudslinging campaigns, no matter what the legal outcome, they can eventually damage the legitimacy of the new government under Tsai.
The DPP would not want a repeat of the Yu Chang case, which hurt Tsai and the party. For the DPP, Wong needs to explain how the OBI shares held by his daughter were sold days prior to the release of clinical trial data for a new breast cancer drug, and apologize for his remarks about the efficacy of OBI-822, despite discouraging test results.
Many investors — who either harbored unrealistic expectations about OBI or were amenable to risky investment and ignored red flags — have seen the losses add up as the company’s shares slumped in view of its failed OBI-822 clinical trials. OBI investors might accept the consequences of their high-risk investment, but they are unlikely to endure their losses if other investors had information about the clinical trial results and were able to sell OBI shares before they were announced.
For now, the Shihlin Prosecutors’ Office in Taipei has started looking into allegations of insider trading, after receiving all related materials from the Financial Supervisory Commission. As the public learns about the alleged OBI shares misconduct and the potential for conflicts of interest of company insiders to arise, it raises the question whether the case reflects a changing fortune in Taiwan’s biotech industry.
In the past couple of years, the government has encouraged biotech development as a way to transform the economy. Since the legislature passed the Biotech and New Pharmaceutical Development Act (生技新藥產業發展條例) in 2007, the government has launched the Hsinchu Biomedical Science Park, state-run venture capital firm TMF Management Co and the biotech-oriented Supra Integration and Incubation Center. In addition, more than 200 biotech-related companies have now raised funds from shareholders on the open market.
However, can such enthusiasm develop the industry into another trillion-New Taiwan dollar industry? Would it come under increased public scrutiny? Would biotech still have a chance to become a pillar of economic growth under Tsai’s policy framework? If a certain group of investors comprising business tycoons, scientists and stock market players have quiet control, would they manipulate biotech shares? Perhaps, but prosecutors need more evidence to prove it.
Whatever the result in the OBI case, strong volatility in biotech shares is likely to be a thing of the past to most people and a forgotten lesson for greedy investors. Even so, the regulator must take disciplinary action against those violating transparency in information disclosure and found guilty of insider trading — for the sake of protecting investors and ensuring the industry’s long-term development.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS