According to news reports, not long after Pan Hsi-hsien
First, how can one just "retire" from the position of NSB personnel director -- a position of such importance -- and then take a job in China? Is it because there aren't any laws and regulations governing this, or are there simply no teeth to enforce these laws?
It seems that there are regulations barring persons retiring from important public positions from going into civilian jobs (at least this is the case for some public servants). In also appears that these retirees cannot work in regions where they might divulge secrets to which they had access. (If there aren't any such rules, some should be laid down immediately).
If the law already regulates those retiring from government positions and yet this kind of incident still occurs, isn't it manifestly evident that a flaw exists in the way the law is applied?
Furthermore, doesn't this incident show that the application of the law has failed at all levels, from the NSB to the Bureau of Entry and Exit? If this is indeed the reason behind the problems, these agencies must rigorously review what happened, to discover where the mistake occurred. If the problem is found to be a systemic one, then these agencies must immediately set about rectifying it.
Second, how could news so closely related to national security be broken by the media, allowing everyone (especially the Chinese government) to hear about it? It is, to say the least, reasonable to presume that Chinese officials would be all too keen to get hold of someone of Pan's standing and that the leaking of such information would make him a specific target in China. There would also -- almost inevitably -- be damage to our national interests that would be difficult to repair.
According to news reports, the leak may have been due to in-fighting in the NSB. If this is true, how could someone do something like this for personal gain? It is simply unthinkable.
What's done is done. Neither identifying nor punishing those responsible is likely to compensate for the damage done. But it should be decided where the focus in solving the problem should now be.
I believe any strategy for resolving the issue should place our national interests at its very core. Government ministries in particular (not to mention the Presidential Office, NSB and Legislative Yuan) should be careful to preserve national interests in their handling of problems arising from this incident, in order to prevent this problem -- this crisis -- from causing further harm.
Yang Yung-nane is a professor in the department of administrative management, Central Police University.
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
The following case, which I experienced as an interpreter, illustrates that many issues in Taiwan’s legal system originate from law enforcement personnel. The problem stems not so much from their education and training, but their personal attitude — characterized by excessive self-confidence paired with a lack of accountability. One day at 10:30am, I was called to a police station in New Taipei City for an emergency. I arrived an hour later. A man was tied to a chair, having been arrested at the airport due to an outstanding arrest warrant. It quickly became apparent that the case was related to
RSS