The Tainan District Court on Tuesday cleared three members of the Taiwan People’s Communist Party who last year put a mask designed to look like the Chinese flag on a statue of Japanese engineer Yoichi Hatta in a public park, before making inflammatory statements. The ruling by the Tainan judge is an example of inconsistent application of the law.
In a video they filmed and uploaded, the three men implied that COVID-19 oginated in either the US or Japan. Such a statement could be considered dissemination of disinformation, which would be an actionable offense. The men also told Japanese in Taiwan to “go home.” The judge said the men’s speech and actions “did not contain extreme hatred or incite crime,” but it would not be a stretch to argue that telling foreigners residing in Taiwan to go “home” is hate speech.
Taiwan does not have laws regulating hate speech like those in Canada or other countries, but the absence of such laws is demonstrative of the inconsistencies in the country’s legal system, which does recognize public defamation of an individual as a criminal offense. In other words, in Taiwan it is illegal to publicly insult an individual on the basis of them being Japanese, but it is not illegal to insult all Japanese as a group. If the aim of the law is to protect a person’s reputation and honor, how can they be protected when the group that the individual is part of can be attacked?
The men also publicly displayed a Chinese flag and said that Taiwan is “part of China.” While that would not constitute an offense in most countries with free speech, Taiwanese legislators have been calling for amending laws to prohibit displaying China’s flag publicly. On April 20 last year, Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Wang Ting-yu (王定宇) and 29 other lawmakers proposed amending the National Security Act (國家安全法) to ban actions that damage national identity or work in favor of a hostile foreign power — which would include displaying China’s flag.
On Feb. 18, the Tainan City Government demolished a building owned by the Taiwan People’s Communist Party that had displayed the Chinese flag. Officials said the building was torn down because it was illegally constructed on farmland. However, the innumerable structures built on farmland nationwide that remain standing suggest that the Chinese flag displayed prominently on the building might have been the real motivation behind tearing it down.
It is clear from the inconsistent actions of authorities in response to pro-China forces in Taiwan that it is unsure how to walk the fine line between protecting democratic rights and tackling what it perceives as national security threats. Few would argue that putting a mask adorned with a Chinese flag on a statue constitutes a threat to the nation, but the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) rarely takes large actions — its strategy is usually to work within the “gray zone,” making small incursions that frustrate its adversaries and test limits.
Last month, national security forces investigated a Taiwanese-founded media production company that was allegedly helping the CCP produce propaganda. If videos espousing unification, distributed through an obscure YouTube channel that most Taiwanese are unlikely to see or hear about are considered a threat to the nation, why is the same not true of people standing in a public park telling passersby that Taiwan is part of China?
Cross-party lawmakers must seriously discuss what speech or actions are to be considered national security threats, which are to be considered harmful to the well-being of those residing in Taiwan, and what actions should be taken in response to such speech or actions.
If there is an inconsistent response by authorities, then there will be rifts in society, and the CCP will take advantage of that inconsistency to wreak havoc in Taiwan.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
RSS