On Tuesday, a bill to recover wrongfully paid government pensions — under a regulation passed in 1971 that allowed KMT officials who held public office to add years worked as a party official to their civil service record — passed its third legislative reading.
About 381 retirees, including former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), former Examination Yuan president John Kuan (關中) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Jason Hu (胡志強), who are paid retirement benefits based on their combined service will have their retirement payments recalculated and be required to return excess payments.
This is intended to display the government’s determination to carry through reform, but many of those affected say that applying the bill retroactively and requiring that payments be returned is unreasonable.
The 1971 regulation was the result of an abnormal situation. In the one-party state, there was a revolving door between the government and the KMT. After some time in government, officials transferred to the KMT to gain more experience, and party position sometimes even outranked government positions. It was normal for the party to train government officials and even direct government policy.
We just have to look at Beijing today to understand that party secretaries have more power than provincial governors or ministers, and to understand what it was like in Taiwan during the one-party state era.
Since officials could move freely between the KMT and the government, benefits continued seamlessly, which of course was the main reason for the system that accepts service in the KMT as qualifying for national pension payments.
Constitutional interpretations 5, 7 and 12 — issued in 1952 and 1953 — state that party secretaries, legislators and party officials were not civil servants, making the practice unconstitutional. However, at the time, the party overruled everything and the Council of Grand Justices’ interpretation fell on deaf ears.
The government continued to condone combining government and party duties. The Examination Yuan was guilty of dereliction of duty and violation of the Constitution, but it was also powerless. The practice has remained and has not been addressed, even though the KMT has lost government power on two occasions.
Given the democratic and legal sophistication of Taiwan and Taiwanese today, a practice that unfairly exploits government resources should be recognized as a violation of social justice and should no longer be tolerated. Yet historical inertia and the stubborn resistance put up by remnants of the one-party state prevented the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) from shaking up the party-state during its first presidential term, when it did not control the legislature.
This time, the DPP has the political clout to pursue this goal, and it can no longer turn a blind eye.
The government’s personnel system may be flawed, but those who enjoy the benefits of combined years of service do not do so out of greed; the regulations are not their fault.
Still, accepting such unreasonable income is shameful. Returning the overpayments to the government would give them peace of mind. If they are not enjoying an adequate income after their retirement, returning the money could mean economic problems, but the act has incorporated a minimum income level and it would only affect those that have a monthly income of NT$25,000 or more.
The combined years of service regulation resulted from historical factors, and the facts of the situation are abundantly clear. Fewer than 400 people would be affected. This is a first step toward ending an unjust system and correcting past wrongs.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
The war between Israel and Iran offers far-reaching strategic lessons, not only for the Middle East, but also for East Asia, particularly Taiwan. As tensions rise across both regions, the behavior of global powers, especially the US under the US President Donald Trump, signals how alliances, deterrence and rapid military mobilization could shape the outcomes of future conflicts. For Taiwan, facing increasing pressure and aggression from China, these lessons are both urgent and actionable. One of the most notable features of the Israel-Iran war was the prompt and decisive intervention of the US. Although the Trump administration is often portrayed as
RSS