Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) New Taipei City Councilor Liao Hsien-hsiang (廖先翔), who is running in January’s legislative election, recently challenged Vice President William Lai (賴清德), the Democratic Progressive Party’s presidential candidate, on the legality of a property his family owns in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里).
Liao said that his family is willing to demolish an illegal structure they own in Sijhih District (汐止), and asked if Lai’s family would do the same.
Lai’s campaign headquarters said that Liao was trying to dodge the controversy surrounding the construction of his family’s luxury villa, which allegedly encroached on state-owned land, involved the cultivation of a slopeland conservation zone and damaged a water quality protection area.
Lai’s office said that was completely different from the Lai family’s property, which is a residence converted from a workers’ dormitory that had been in a state of disrepair for many years.
Lai’s old house is reportedly on land that was originally designated for mining. In 1963, mining authorities approved a mining plan in accordance with the Mining Act (礦業法), but in 1981 they classified the plot as in a slopeland conservation zone.
Under Article 54 of the central government’s Regulations on Non-urban Land Use Control (非都市土地使用管制規則), before an application can been approved to reclassify mining land as land for other uses, the Bureau of Mines — recently merged into the Geological Survey and Mining Management Agency — must, in accordance with the original mining plan, examine and approve the land’s permitted uses.
In such cases where a piece of land was long ago designated for mining, but where the mining plan has since been annulled, there is no mechanism or law to follow regarding the standard procedure for dealing with the original mining facilities, such as workers’ dormitories, and how they might be used.
In contrast, the luxurious villa built in 2011 by Liao’s father, Liao Cheng-liang (廖正良), which occupies an area of 800 ping (2,645m2), not only allegedly encroaches on state-owned land, but is situated in a water conservation area that is also susceptible to landslides, contravening several laws.
This is in contrast to Lai’s old house, which only occupies about 30 ping, and has existed since 1951, long before the area plan came into effect. After many years, the building fell into disrepair. It was refurbished in 2003, which was long before June 2, 2011, when the New Taipei City Government promulgated its guidelines for approving and issuing proof of legal buildings.
Furthermore, Lai’s old house was originally a miners’ dormitory that was built long ago in accordance with the Mining Act, making it quite different from what is now known as an “illegal structure.”
Even though verbal confrontations are expected during elections, statements should still be based on facts and laws, and should not disregard them. Given that the New Taipei City Land Administration Department has not yet been able to determine the status of Lai’s property, it is highly presumptuous to call it an “illegal structure.”
Furthermore, Lai’s attitude is clear. He respects the conclusions of government agencies, including the Geological Survey and Mining Management Agency and the Taipei City Government, and would cooperate in addressing the matter. In view of these facts, lawmakers should desist from misleading the public.
Lee Hong-jen is a professor of law at National Taichung University of Science and Technology.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
RSS