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.
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional
RSS