As Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben said: “The real problem, the central mystery of politics is not sovereignty, but government; it is not God, but the angel; it is not the king, but ministry; it is not the law, but the police.”
Protests are common in Taiwan and police’s handling of such activities often draws attention. This was the case during the Sunflower movement in 2014, a protest during the opening ceremony of the Taipei Universiade last year, and the arrest of protesters and lawyers during a march in December last year against the amendments to the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法), who were forced into police cars and “dropped off” at random locations.
Take for example the “drop-offs.” From a legal perspective, the matter involved police bringing people under control through the use of force, which included restrictions on their personal freedom or actions, and even temporary or preventative deprivation of their freedom.
Even though such an exercise of police power is in line with the European Convention on Human Rights, its actual application remains controversial.
Then there are assemblies and parades: The key with these is how to accurately predict how a situation is likely to unfold. Police are required to use their discretion and judgement to decide whether a given situation is dangerous or not.
Simply claiming that protesters might intend to violate the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法) is not sufficient reason to legitimize police intervention — even with regards to so-called preventive restriction.
Unless there are clear threatening acts at the scene, a simple march, in itself, is not dangerous.
According to the European Court of Human Rights, if police restrict protesters’ personal freedom first and then disperse them later, they must act on the premise that the dispersion is legal. Thus, the police must give a clear and definite order for dispersion.
However, when people refuse to disperse, the restriction of their personal freedom must be according to the principle of proportionality. Since bringing people under control would violate their human rights, such control must be associated with the prevention of criminal acts, so as to prevent people from committing punishable crimes.
Considering this, police really need to review their use of force of “drop-offs” on Dec. 23.
This is an era of “critical citizens.” Spanish activists shouted “Real democracy now” during street protests and Time magazine named “the protester” its 2011 “Person of the Year.”
As political commentators have said, people no longer indulge in a sense of powerlessness while feeling sorry for themselves. Instead of whining that they cannot change anything, many people are now taking action to vent their anger.
UK economist Peter Jay once said that, like a snake biting its own tail, our democracy has started to swallow itself. In the face of a broken society, people’s search for new democracy and politics has highlighted the importance of protest.
It seems necessary that the police practice proper use of force when handling assemblies and parades, so that they can start to understand and promote true democracy.
Lin Chia-ho is an associate professor at the National Chengchi University’s College of Law.
Translated by Eddy Chang
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS