National Internet surveillance is opaque and lacks clear legal regulation, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights said yesterday, announcing the results of its first Taiwan Internet Transparency Report.
“The people have a right to know how cases [of Internet surveillance] occur every year, what the legal foundation is and how the process is run,” Taiwan Association for Human Rights secretary-general Chiu E-ling (邱伊翎) said, citing widespread Internet usage around the nation.
She said that many government agencies had refused to provide statistics on Internet surveillance, making it difficult to near impossible to compile complete figures.
“The current data situation is extremely unrealistic,” association specialist Ho Ming-hsuan (何明諠) said, adding that the number of cases of Internet surveillance statistically provided by government agencies was far lower than the number of requests reported by major Internet companies.
The association said that Google, Yahoo, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft reported that they had received 4,181 Internet surveillance requests from the Taiwanese government in the first half of last year. However, government agencies only acknowledged making 4,908 Internet surveillance requests for the three years spanning 2012 to last year.
“Given the lack of transparency, how can the people trust that the government is not acting arbitrarily?” he said.
Only half of the government agencies with authority to conduct Internet surveillance provided data in response to the association’s Freedom of Government Information Law (政府資訊公開法) request.
The National Security Bureau said that it was not obligated to provide data, while the Ministry of Justice’s Investigation Bureau denied that it had conducted any Internet surveillance, he said.
Academia Sinica associate research professor Chiou Wen-tsong (邱文聰) said that interviews with corporations had also revealed that in some cases, government agencies were “acting as they see fit.”
Most Internet surveillance is not subject to warrant requirements under the Communication Security and Surveillance Act (通訊保障及監察法), because the government interprets the act as applying only to intercepted messages, allowing it to treat stored e-mails as ordinary evidence, he said.
Ho said that the Criminal Investigation Bureau of the National Police Agency had declined to cite a specific legal foundation for their Internet surveillance requests, referring the association to the Laws and Regulations Database of the Republic of China maintained by the Ministry of Justice.
Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Kuan Bi-ling (管碧玲) said there were cases in which law enforcement agencies appeared to have misled legislators about the extent of their surveillance.
She cited a case in which the police had contacted numerous users of a smartphone application, despite saying in response to questions that they had only looked up the contact information for the responsible firm’s chief executive officer and corporate board from official registration documents. She said she suspected that they obtained user contact information from banks after tracking the sources of transactions using the application.
The association called on government bureaus to publicize data on Internet surveillance and clearly outline the legal foundation and process used for surveillance they conduct, also calling for the establishment of an independent watchdog.
Taiwanese can file complaints with the Tourism Administration to report travel agencies if their activities caused termination of a person’s citizenship, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said yesterday, after a podcaster highlighted a case in which a person’s citizenship was canceled for receiving a single-use Chinese passport to enter Russia. The council is aware of incidents in which people who signed up through Chinese travel agencies for tours of Russia were told they could obtain Russian visas and fast-track border clearance, Chiu told reporters on the sidelines of an event in Taipei. However, the travel agencies actually applied
Japanese footwear brand Onitsuka Tiger today issued a public apology and said it has suspended an employee amid allegations that the staff member discriminated against a Vietnamese customer at its Taipei 101 store. Posting on the social media platform Threads yesterday, a user said that an employee at the store said that “those shoes are very expensive” when her friend, who is a migrant worker from Vietnam, asked for assistance. The employee then ignored her until she asked again, to which she replied: "We don't have a size 37." The post had amassed nearly 26,000 likes and 916 comments as of this
New measures aimed at making Taiwan more attractive to foreign professionals came into effect this month, the National Development Council said yesterday. Among the changes, international students at Taiwanese universities would be able to work in Taiwan without a work permit in the two years after they graduate, explainer materials provided by the council said. In addition, foreign nationals who graduated from one of the world’s top 200 universities within the past five years can also apply for a two-year open work permit. Previously, those graduates would have needed to apply for a work permit using point-based criteria or have a Taiwanese company
The Shilin District Prosecutors’ Office yesterday indicted two Taiwanese and issued a wanted notice for Pete Liu (劉作虎), founder of Shenzhen-based smartphone manufacturer OnePlus Technology Co (萬普拉斯科技), for allegedly contravening the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) by poaching 70 engineers in Taiwan. Liu allegedly traveled to Taiwan at the end of 2014 and met with a Taiwanese man surnamed Lin (林) to discuss establishing a mobile software research and development (R&D) team in Taiwan, prosecutors said. Without approval from the government, Lin, following Liu’s instructions, recruited more than 70 software
RSS