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
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
RSS