The Executive Yuan yesterday approved changes to the Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau's
From now on, the MJIB's "domestic security investigations" will include China's activities in Taiwan; unfriendly activities of foreign nationals; activities that violate the Constitution or other laws; economic, financial, technological and information security; and investigation of other issues affecting national security. Political surveillance has been eliminated.
There have been countless examples of the ruling party using intelligence agencies to suppress opposition movements and of intelligence agencies collecting information on opposition figures through illegal and underhand methods. For the convenience of people in power, the intelligence units even collected information on other politicians. These measures gave intelligence work a bad name.
Every justice minister has tussled with the National Security Bureau (NSB) in an attempt to gain control of the MJIB's political surveillance work. Liao Cheng-hao (廖正豪) had a falling out with the NSB over a program designed to strengthen political surveillance. The current minister, Chen Ding-nan (陳定南), also fought for the separation of intelligence and law-enforcement work. But the NSB, with its close ties to the president, always had the advantage.
Eliminating political surveillance is an important step in the reform of the intelligence agencies, but it does not necessarily mean the MJIB will never be involved in political surveillance again. Many of the bureau's new responsibilities are just a thin line away from such tasks. In criminal investigations of politicians, such as the current crackdown on "black gold" politics, the slightest indiscretion can easily lead to accusations of political oppression. A lack of self-restraint on the MJIB's part can bring back the spectre of political surveillance.
Abolishing political surveillance does not imply ignoring national security. The bureau's future responsibilities should be focused on security threats from China and other countries. It should stay current with new modes of technological, economic, or information warfare. The NSB has also set up a technology team and a WTO entry team to tackle new modes of warfare and to strengthen its control over factors that may threaten national security.
Clarifying the MJIB's intelligence and law-enforcement roles is a first step in the reform of intelligence institutions. The bureau should also differentiate its responsibilities from those of the criminal police and turn itself into a specialized criminal investigation agency, perhaps along the lines of the US' Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The control and supervision of intelligence powers is of utmost importance in improving intelligence regulations. Currently, the president single-handedly controls the intelligence system, without any checks and balances from other branches of government. This is hardly compatible with the principles of democracy. The legislature should set up an intelligence committee to supervise the policies and budgets of intelligence agencies. Regulations should also be enacted to require the de-classification of intelligence files so that posterity can scrutinize the work of intelligence agents. Multiple supervision is the best prevention of the abuse of intelligence powers.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
RSS