Bowing to an outcry from local human rights groups, the National Science Council (NSC) recently froze its project to create a national genetic database. The ethical, legal and social issues resulting from genetic research have generated much debate in Taiwan over the past 10 years. There has been a lack of communication between the NSC and the nation's research institutes, and there remains a lack of awareness among research institutes of the gravity of the issues involved.
It is this lack of awareness and communication that brought about the scandal over falsified stem-cell research results sparked by South Korean cloning expert Hwang Woo-suk. The public outcry in Taiwan underlines the need for adjustments in the way we think about the issues surrounding a genetic database.
Since human genetic research is bound to be highly controversial, it is an area which must be regulated through legislation. Legislation won't solve every problem, but it can regulate and encourage certain patterns of behavior, as well as clarify the main issues in the controversy.
Currently, the tendency is to use the principles of intellectual property rights (IPR) management, and the concepts of informed consent and rights to privacy, as the basis for the consideration of genetic research. But the intention of IPR is to protect exclusive rights within the marketplace, and so is perhaps not best suited for use when we are considering genetic research that deals with the secrets of life itself. In such a field, the full majesty of the law should be used to strike a balance between public and private interests.
At first, it might seem that the principle of informed consent should apply to the establishment of a genetic database. But if we look at the issue more closely, such a principle alone is not suitable for dealing with issues relating to the establishment of a highly centralized genetic database. Such a database presents a basic tension between the public interest and the constitutional rights of the individual.
As to the concept of privacy, under US law, this is linked to the freedom of action and individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution. In Taiwan, under Constitutional Interpretation No. 603, an emphasis is placed on access to information. However, the concept of privacy is limited when dealing with issues relating to the obtaining and transfer of genetic information.
Constitutional Interpretation No. 603 and a public debate about the idea of a genetic database should guide the government and research centers' decisions. For example, the ban on a photo database or personal files of all citizens should stay in place, especially as regards the building of a DNA database. Even if information is catalogued in such a way that the donor remains anonymous, it would remain possible through gathering information from various sources to create complete or at least partial dossiers on individuals. This must be prevented, so that individuals do not incriminate themselves or get labeled based on such a databank. Any attempt to link the genetic database to medical records or household registrations must be strictly forbidden.
The effort to complete a genetic map of all human beings was undertaken to get a better picture of how human life evolved. To achieve this, we should consider what role the Legislative Yuan, the Executive Yuan and the Judicial Yuan are going to play and what citizens can do in order to reach consensus on this matter.
In short, adequate public communication prior to the enactment of a law is crucial to preserving social order. In our quest to penetrate the mysteries of life, we should not discard a basic respect for the public will and individual rights.
Yen Chueh-an is a law professor at National Taiwan University
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
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