The Ministry of Justice on Monday said that it might propose a law that targets hate crimes and hate speech, in response to a shooting targeting a Taiwanese congregation in California.
It is an odd move for the ministry to consider new legislation in response to a crime that occurred in another nation. It might be understandable if there had been concern about a rise in hate crimes within Taiwan’s borders, but hate crimes are unlikely in Taiwan.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines a hate crime as “typically one involving violence, that is motivated by prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or similar grounds.”
Roughly 98 percent of Taiwanese identify as “Han Chinese,” according to official statistics. While there has historically been violence between those already in Taiwan and new arrivals from China (so-called waishengren, 外省人), as well as historical conflicts between Han settlers and indigenous people, violence on such grounds is exceedingly rare today.
There is also no endemic problem of religious strife or systemic violence toward those of the LGBTQ community, and mass shootings do not occur in Taiwan, which has strict gun laws.
If the ministry is to propose new legislation to target hate crimes, it should define the crimes it is concerned about.
The suspect in the California church shooting has been linked to an organization connected with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and it is known that the CCP is working to create social strife within Taiwan, but its activities in Taiwan might already be addressed by existing laws. For example, the dissemination of fake news and the poaching of Taiwanese talent are addressed by laws such as the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例).
Taiwan already criminalizes defamation and it could introduce a hate speech law as an extension of that, to protect identifiable groups of people, but it is debatable whether such a law is needed.
One instance in which it might have been applicable was during the buildup to the 2020 presidential election when people were targeted for being supporters or critics of presidential candidate and former Kaohsiung mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜).
If people are harassed or attacked for their opinions about a political candidate, that could interfere with the democratic process and China could use that to cause rifts in Taiwanese society.
It is the CCP and its “united front” tactics that are the greatest concern for the government, and any discussion of legislative proposals stemming from the church shooting should focus on those efforts, rather than on hate crimes in general.
Following the shooting, some legislators urged the government to look into organizations operating in Taiwan that are suspected of having ties to the CCP. That would be a good place for the judiciary to start.
Some have also said that the High Court’s acquittal of the New Party’s Wang Ping-chung (王炳忠) on spying charges would embolden the CCP and its supporters in Taiwan.
There have been cases of attacks on people in Taiwan who expressed support for democracy in Hong Kong, or who were otherwise outspoken about the CCP. That such attacks can occur in Taiwan, and that some people could self-censor as a result, should be cause for grave concern.
The CCP continues to be a threat to democracy in Taiwan and if new legislation can somehow curb that threat, it would be prudent to propose such legislation. However, the government must determine the nature of the threat and whether existing laws are inadequate.
Whether hate crime laws are needed in Taiwan depends on how hate crime is defined, and whether that definition should be applied to Taiwanese society.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
The Honduran elections seem to have put China on defense. The promises of trade and aid have failed to materialize, industries are frustrated, and leading candidate Salvador Nasralla, who has increased his lead in the polls, has caused Beijing to engage in a surge of activity that appears more like damage control than partnership building. As Nasralla’s momentum has grown, China’s diplomacy, which seems to be dormant since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 2023, has shown several attempts to avoid a reversal if the Liberal or the National party — which also favor Taipei — emerge as winners in the
RSS