A private corporation or institution has the right to grant employees special paid leave to study for a doctoral degree. People might look on in envy, but they have no say in the matter.
However, people are entitled to say a thing or two if the same scenario takes place at a government institution, as it concerns taxpayers’ money.
Legislator Ann Kao (高虹安), the Taiwan People’s Party’s (TPP) candidate for Hsinchu mayor, has been trying to justify her “privilege” and explain why she was given special paid leave at the Institute for Information Industry, which allowed her to spend 574 days on “business trips” within six years to obtain a doctoral degree at the University of Cincinnati.
Her initial defense was that the institute was a private entity. Little did she know that the institute’s president is required to attend interpellation sessions at the legislature when needed. This is enough to show that the institute is not a purely private entity. Despite being a legislator, it seems that Kao has little idea of a legislator’s duties.
It should be investigated why Kao had the privilege of being granted special paid leave to study for a doctorate in the US.
Was it because her supervisors and superiors at the institute were in the dark about her actions, or did they make an exception for her and help cover up her actions?
Former institute president Wu Ruey-beei (吳瑞北) showed his support for Kao. Using Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) as an example, Wu said that Chang in 1988 also moonlighted as TSMC chairman while serving as chairman of the Industrial Technology Research Institute.
Without Chang holding the two positions, there would be no TSMC, Wu said.
Despite speaking up for Kao, Wu evaded questions on whether it is illegal to take special paid leave at the institute to study for a doctoral degree.
Coincidentally, Wu in 2017 published a book that contained an introduction written by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taoyuan mayoral candidate Simon Chang (張善政), who is accused of plagiarizing papers from a NT$57 million (US$1.77 million) research project he undertook for the Council of Agriculture from 2007 to 2009.
It would seem that Wu, Simon Chang and Kao are in a secret circle at the institute.
Further, Kao seems to have connections to Hon Hai Precision Industry Co, whose vice chairman, Jay Lee (李傑), was her doctoral dissertation adviser.
Within his first year at the company, and before being promoted to his current position in July 2019, Lee pulled the strings for Kao to have a job interview with Hon Hai founder Terry Gou (郭台銘).
On April 21, 2018, when Kao was still employed at the institute, she signed an employment contract with Hon Hai. On April 27 that year, Kao’s dissertation was approved. On May 15, she resigned from the institute, and a day later started her new job as director of Hon Hai’s big data center.
Putting in a good word for her, Gou in 2020 had the TPP put her on the list of legislator-at-large nominees. It is apparent that Gou, Lee and Kao are all members of the Hon Hai cult.
It is ironic that Taipei Mayor and TPP Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), who rose to power because of his anti-elitist image, would now treat Kao, an elitist flaunting privileges at the institute and Hon Hai, as his right-hand woman.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Rita Wang
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS