To control the COVID-19 pandemic during the New Year holiday, the Ministry of Health and Welfare launched Skynet — a smartphone-based GPS tracking system to enforce quarantine or health management restrictions — and used it to catch people who breached the guidelines by going to a year-end concert by rock band Mayday.
As the system shares its name with China’s massive surveillance network, people are worried whether it monitors everyone in Taiwan. In reaction, the ministry immediately changed the name to Electronic Fence 2.0 and insisted that its implementation is legally sound.
However, the question is if the ministry’s authorization based on the Communicable Disease Control Act (傳染病防治法) is clear enough. According to Article 44, the ministry may order mandatory treatment, isolation or other necessary means to curb the spread of an infectious disease.
The Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) implemented five measures based on the article: health surveying, tracking, self-management and self-observation, as well as home isolation.
However, as the number of people under restrictions increases, the conventional ways of monitoring — visiting people at home or calling them by telephone — have become inadequate to meet the needs of the developing situation and must be assisted by technology.
According to the law, those who are subject to electronic surveillance can be divided into two categories. The first category is regulated in the Sexual Assault Crime Prevention Act (性侵害犯罪防治法), which allows monitoring of an offender on parole or probation in the implementation of their sentence after obtaining permission by a prosecutor. The second category is regulated in the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法), which allows monitoring to prevent a defendant from fleeing after being granted suspension of detention, and requires permission by a court.
These types of monitoring are based on nonstop GPS tracking.
However, the intensive monitoring applied in criminal law cannot be used for the prevention and control of a pandemic, as people under quarantine are neither defendants nor prisoners. Therefore, only base stations operated by Taiwan’s telecoms can be used to track smartphone signals to monitor if a person contravenes the guidelines.
This kind of tracking provides only information about whether the monitored person is moving about without permission, but it does not allow for an immediate, accurate localization of the phone’s owner.
The new system marks a change from passive to active monitoring, as it obtains data from base stations around the nation and monitors whether a person under quarantine or self-health management enters a specific area, for example where Mayday holds a concert.
Although it does not provide continuous monitoring, it allows for accurate tracking similar to a GPS-based system, raising doubts as to whether it contravenes the principle of proportionality.
Even though the ministry and the CECC are authorized to adopt pandemic prevention measures, electronic monitoring is not regulated by the Communicable Disease Control Act, or the Special Act for Prevention, Relief and Revitalization Measures for Severe Pneumonia with Novel Pathogens (嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎防治及紓困振興特別條例).
This could lead to arbitrary interpretation and decisions that could contravene human rights.
Therefore, legislators must introduce legal amendments, stipulating that data obtained for pandemic prevention cannot be used for other purposes, as well as the data retention period.
Wu Ching-chin is an associate law professor at Aletheia University and the director of the university’s Research Center for Criminal Law.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
When I visited Taiwan last summer, I called on the nation to use its status as a technology superpower to build superweapons. It is obvious to me as I return a year later that Taiwan is now answering that call. By 2030, Taiwan envisions a domestic drone hub, capable of producing large quantities of drones per year. The nation continues to tighten cooperation across the private sector, scientific researchers and the elected government, on creating new and innovative production avenues for defense, while efforts to become central to the “democratic supply chain” are only increasing. Anduril is seeing all of these positive
Singaporean former Prime Minister and current senior minister Lee Hsien- Loong(李顯龍) last month stood on Chinese soil and told Beijing that Singapore cooperates because of “shared interests”, not because of common “ethnic descent,” a significant statement that has upended China’s cognitive warfare tactics of “ethnic nationalism.” Along with using its military buildup and economic growth to expand its international dominance, China has long deployed ethnic politics to promote the idea that all ethnic Chinese around the world, regardless of citizenship, share a tight bond with the Chinese motherland, by which it means the regime of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
President William Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) May 20 second-anniversary address was not just a routine policy review; it was damage control. US President Donald Trump’s remarks — that he did not want to see anyone move toward independence and that the delivery of a major Taiwan arms package could depend on the progress of US-China relations — unsettled Taiwan’s public and created an opening for opposition parties to question whether Taiwan was being treated as a bargaining chip in Washington’s dealings with Beijing. Lai’s speech was designed to close that opening. The address covered the expected ground: sovereignty, cross-strait relations, defense spending,
RSS