On his first day in office, independent Hualien County Commissioner Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁) appointed his “ex-wife” Hsu Chen-wei (徐榛蔚) as deputy commissioner, provoking a storm of public debate.
The Ministry of the Interior (MOI) made the unusual move of immediately releasing a press statement to declare the appointment invalid.
Yet the Ministry of Civil Service, charged with implementing the Civil Service Employment Act (工務人員任用法), said that although it is illegal for an official to appoint a spouse as his or her deputy, the law no longer applies once the two are divorced.
The MOI then tweaked its stance, announcing that since the two were divorced, the appointment should be valid, unless the pair were still living under the same roof, which would violate the Public Officials Conflict of Interest Prevention Act (公職人員利益衝突迴避法).
The MOI deserves credit for its effort to find a legal basis to stop an appointment that would undermine the legal system. It must be said, however, that the ministry’s grasp of the law is a little weak if the best it can do is grope around for countermeasures whenever political hacks make a mockery of the legal system by abusing their powers and playing games with the law.
Everyone knows that fake marriages with immigrants are against the law — the crime in question being forgery. This is because civil servants then issue a false document, effectively colluding in a fictitious declaration of marriage.
Fu and Hsu finalized their divorce on Dec. 18, just before Fu took office.
It is obvious that the purpose of this action was to evade the appointment restriction imposed by the Civil Service Employment Act.
In reality, divorce is not just a matter of filling out a few forms. It involves practical matters such as dividing property and determining custody of children.
More to the point, there should be no cohabitation or common property after the divorce.
At his inauguration this month, Fu even addressed Hsu as his “taitai” (太太, wife) and praised her for marrying him in his time of difficulty and for standing by him.
It is glaringly obvious that the two are still in a husband-and-wife relationship and that their divorce was a fictitious claim that lead a public servant to issue an untrue document.
There can be no doubt that a fake divorce is a form of forgery, and therefore a crime under the law.
Furthermore, the purpose of this particular fake divorce was to evade the restriction on appointments laid down by Article 26 of the Civil Service Employment Act.
It was a conspiracy to secure the position of deputy county commissioner, a public position, for Hsu.
Prosecutors should take action to uphold the integrity of the legal system for the sake of the public good.
Instead of waiting for someone to file a complaint, they should take the initiative by investigating Fu and Hsu’s fake divorce and prosecuting the couple. Prosecutors are duty bound to fight crime by strictly enforcing the law.
Four years ago, then Taitung county commissioner Wu Chun-li (吳俊立) was removed from office after being found guilty on corruption charges in his first trial.
Upon being sworn into office, Wu had appointed his “ex-wife” Kuang Li-chen (鄺麗貞) as his deputy commissioner.
This was never investigated, however, because Wu lost his position after the (unrelated) corruption trial. Yet this, too, was an unlawful appointment following a fake divorce. As it occurred just four years ago, the statutory period for investigating the case has not yet expired. In fact, the two divorce cases can, and should, be investigated together.
It is to be hoped that prosecutors will take action now to deter shameless politicians from taking the electorate for a ride.
The restrictions on political appointments stipulated in Article 26 of the Civil Service Employment Act are basic conditions for combating corruption.
Those in the government should use every means at their disposal to uphold anti-corruption regulations.
Otherwise, Taiwan’s efforts to stop conflicts of interest will come to naught.
For the sake of the integrity of our legal system, the authorities should do all they can to prevent appointments that violate the law, while prosecutors should launch immediate investigations into these cases and prosecute all those involved.
Once a court of law has found a politician’s divorce to be fake, formally declaring it null and void, Article 26 of the Civil Service Employment Act will apply, and an appointment that is illegal will automatically become null and void, too.
Lee Ching-hsiung is a lawyer and former member of the Examination Yuan.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
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
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