China’s counter-espionage Law amended on Saturday last week and Foreign Investment Law enacted on Jan. 1 last year were designed to work together.
Article 4, Paragraph 3 of the Counter-Espionage Law gives a broad definition of acts of espionage, ie: “Activities carried out, instigated or funded by foreign institutions, organizations and individuals other than espionage organizations and their representatives, or in which domestic institutions, organizations or individuals collude, to steal, pry into, purchase or illegally provide state secrets, intelligence and other documents, data, materials or items related to national security, or in which state employees are incited, enticed, coerced or bought over to turn traitor.”
This definition provides law enforcement officials with greater administrative discretion and “free evaluation of evidence” to define virtually anyone as a spy if they want to. Anyone can become a spy in the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) eyes at any time, even through perfectly innocent or innocuous activities such as conventional market research or travel photography.
This definition is similar to articles 34 and 35 of the Foreign Investment Law. Article 34 says: “The state shall establish a foreign investment information reporting system. Foreign investors or foreign-funded enterprises shall submit the investment information to competent departments for commerce through the enterprise registration system and the enterprise credit information publicity system.”
Article 35 adds: “The state shall establish a safety review system for foreign investment, under which the safety review shall be conducted for any foreign investment affecting or having the possibility to affect national security.”
Articles 34 and 35 provide the CCP with greater administrative discretion and room for interpretation to call anyone a “national security violator” if it wants. The lack of implementation regulations for the two articles would allow Beijing to force foreign investors to submit operational plans and business secrets to meet its requirements for security review.
The two acts share the characteristic of “Chinese rule of law” — articles without details about how they are to be implemented. This characteristic gives officials room for “power rent-seeking,” which is not only a breeding ground for corruption, but also a political leader’s tool to purge perceived enemies.
It is ordinary people and investors who will suffer in the end.
Taiwanese should take precautionary measures when coducting business or traveling in China to avoid unexpected jeopardy.
Yu Kung is a Taiwanese entrepreneur working in China.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then