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
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
Sitting in their homes typing on their keyboards and posting on Facebook things like, “Taiwan has already lost its democracy,” “The Democratic Progressive Party is a party of green communists,” or “President William Lai [賴清德] is a dictator,” then turning around and heading to the convenience store to buy a tea egg and an iced Americano, casually chatting in a Line group about which news broadcast was more biased this morning — are such people truly clear about the kind of society in which they are living? This is not meant to be sarcasm or criticism, but an exhausted honesty.
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
RSS