Three men accused of throwing red paint on Lam Wing-kei (林榮基), a former manager of Hong Kong’s Causeway Bay Books, at a coffee shop in Taipei were released on bail on Thursday, and a separate individual posted a threat against Lam on the Mainland Affairs Council’s Facebook page.
Although someone had earlier warned Lam that the name of his new bookstore in Taipei was similar to one registered to another store (suggesting that this was a motive for the attack), it was discovered that the competing bookstore was likely a shell company registered to an entity in China.
These actions are just the latest in a series of attacks targeting pro-democracy Hong Kongers in Taiwan over the past few years. On Sept. 29 last year, Hong Kong singer and democracy campaigner Denise Ho (何韻詩) was attacked with red paint while speaking at a rally in support of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement, and on Jan. 7, 2017, Hong Kong lawmakers Edward Yiu (姚松炎), Nathan Law (羅冠聰) and Eddie Chu (朱凱迪), as well as Hong Kong activist Joshua Wong (黃之鋒), were the targets of an attempted assault at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport. Members of the China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) have been charged over both attacks.
Five CUPP members were also indicted for a Sept. 24, 2017, attack on student protesters at National Taiwan University. The students had been protesting the use of the school’s sports field to host the “Sing! China: Shanghai-Taipei Music Festival” when they were attacked by CUPP members wielding metal rods.
Pro-China groups such as the CUPP have clearly grown comfortable with using violence and intimidation to assert their views regarding the nation’s sovereignty. This cannot be tolerated. The government must send a clear message that Taiwan’s democracy will not be used as a tool to destroy that very freedom.
At face value, crimes like splashing paint on someone, issuing threats online or even physically assaulting someone are not considered major crimes in the nation’s courts, nor do they carry hefty punishments. For this reason suspects in these cases should be investigated under the Anti-infiltration Act (反滲透法). Those involved in such acts almost certainly have ties to China, and it would be surprising if investigators were unable to trace their funding back to sources across the Strait.
People like Lam have left Hong Kong because China has not respected the territory’s autonomy guaranteed under the “one country, two systems” formula, and the democracy and freedoms promised to residents there have been all but stripped away. Coming under threat in Taiwan — where they had believed they would be free — is surely a traumatic experience. This psychological trauma must be factored into any judicial ruling levied against those found threatening political refugees in Taiwan.
Many democracies have laws to protect people from hate-based and politically motivated crimes. In Canada, the Criminal Code prohibits hateful speech or actions based on race, color, ancestry, place of origin, religion, creed, political opinion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation or age. Depending on the nature of the crime, these offenses are punishable with fines, probation or imprisonment.
If the Anti-infiltration Act cannot be applied, then the government must consider enacting hate laws that would strictly penalize people who threaten or assault others based on their political views. When protesters supporting Hong Kong’s democracy movement confronted those condemning it on the streets of Toronto and Vancouver last year, both factions mostly kept to opposite sides of the street.
Differing political views are an important part of a healthy democracy, but violence based on those views is never acceptable. Taiwan must prevent such violence to protect its democracy.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS