On Thursday last week, the Supreme Court finalized a guilty conviction against Chinese citizen Zhou Hongxu (周泓旭) for espionage and the 14-month sentence originally handed down by the Taipei District Court in 2017 — also upheld by the High Court in April last year — for breaches of the National Security Act (國家安全法).
This case is in stark contrast to the plight of Taiwanese human rights advocate Lee Ming-che (李明哲), who is being detained in China for engaging in “activities endangering national security.”
Lee’s “crime” was to give an online Chinese friend humanities and social sciences books; share information about the 228 Incident, the subsequent White Terror period and Taiwan’s transition from party-state rule to democracy, including transitional justice and the Sunflower movement; and to provide assistance to Chinese human rights advocates and their families.
Zhou received a 14-month custodial sentence from a Taiwanese court after having been found guilty of espionage, but Lee was handed a five-year sentence by a Chinese court for engaging in “activities endangering national security” and was deprived of his political rights for two years.
This begs the question: Are Taiwan’s law and judges too lenient or are China’s too harsh? Or perhaps Zhou was deserving of a light sentence and Lee was just unlucky?
Taiwanese are of course powerless when it comes to influencing Chinese courts, but they have a right to speak up about their own country’s judges and Zhou’s sentencing.
During the era of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), people convicted of espionage were frequently sentenced to death, and their family members left destitute and homeless. Anyone who received an eight or 10-year prison sentence would have thanked their lucky stars.
It is unclear whether it is due to a genuine newfound respect for human rights or a reduced sense of threat from the “enemy within,” but things have changed since the two Chiangs left the stage and the abolition of Article 100 of the Criminal Code — which provided the legal basis for the government to restrict freedom of expression.
Today, serious crimes such as murder and arson are given much softer sentences than in the past, and the same is true about helping spies or not reporting them.
For example, retired Republic of China Army major general Hsu Nai-chuan (許乃權), who was recruited along with a number of other military officers by then-Chinese People’s Liberation Army intelligence officer Zhen Xiaojiang (鎮小江), received a prison sentence of only two years and 10 months.
Not only that: After Hsu was released from prison in September 2017, he was still entitled to a monthly pension of NT$70,000.
In Taiwan today, a severe punishment for spying is a mere two years and 10 months behind bars, but it can be as short as 14 months. Perhaps the concept of a foreign enemy should be abolished altogether?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Edward Jones
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS