The Taiwan People’s Party has a two-year clause for its at-large seats in the Legislative Yuan, with eight legislators expected to resign in 2026. Among the nominees for a replacement is Li Zhenxiu (李貞秀), the Chinese spouse of a Taiwanese national. The question is whether she must give up her Chinese nationality.
This issue is simple in some ways and complex in others. The law clearly stipulates that individuals of foreign nationality cannot hold public office in Taiwan. So, according to the law, Li cannot hold public office. The issue becomes more complicated when considering this question: Are those holding People’s Republic of China (PRC) nationality considered foreign nationals? If so, how should one go about renouncing their PRC nationality?
One might argue that the preamble of the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC) (中華民國憲法增修條文) states: “To meet the requisites of the nation prior to national unification,” while Article 1 of 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) states: “This act is specially enacted for the purposes of ensuring the security and public welfare in the Taiwan Area ... before national unification.”
From these examples, it seems that those holding PRC nationality are not considered foreign nationals. However, these provisions present a false and unrealistic narrative — the reality is that some countries acknowledge that Taiwan — the ROC — is a country, while others acknowledge that the PRC is a country.
Many democratic states have indicated that UN Resolution 2758 does not involve Taiwan, and therefore does not preclude Taiwan from participating in international organizations. In other words, Taiwan and China are both countries — or, in the words of President William Lai (賴清德), they are not subordinate to each other.
The Nationality Act (國籍法) stipulates that “a national of the ROC who acquires the nationality of another country shall have no right to hold government offices of the ROC.”
Therefore, people must renounce their foreign nationality — Chinese included — if they hope to serve as a legislator. Article 3 of the Legislators’ Conduct Act (立法委員行為法) states that it is the responsibility of legislators to perform duties on behalf of nationals, and should therefore observe the Constitution and be loyal to the nation.
Additionally, according to Article 2 of the Oath Act (宣誓條), legislators are required to take the oath outlined in the act, including the content: “I do solemnly and sincerely swear that I will observe the Constitution, be loyal to the nation, and perform duties on behalf of nationals without playing favorites and committing irregularities, pursuing personal profits, taking bribes, or interfering in the judicial process. Should I break my oath, I shall be willing to submit myself to the severest punishment.”
To be loyal to the nation, however, could one really possess the nationality of another country? How can you truly be loyal as a foreign national?
It is entirely logical that legislators must first renounce foreign nationality before taking office.
However, if Li wants to renounce her PRC nationality, obtaining the necessary documents might prove difficult. Article 16 of the Chinese nationality law states: “Applications for ... renunciation of Chinese nationality are subject to examination and approval by the Ministry of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China. The Ministry of Public Security shall issue a certificate to any person whose application has been approved.”
In this situation, it is unlikely that the Chinese Ministry of Public Security would approve Li’s application and provide her with the documents to renounce her PRC nationality.
There might be a workaround: When Li takes her oath of office to become a legislator, she could publicly present a document indicating her intent to renounce her Chinese nationality. In fact, Article 9, Section 4 of the Nationality Act states: “A foreign national may be exempted from submitting a certificate of loss of original nationality if ... he/she cannot obtain a certificate of loss of original nationality for reasons not attributable to himself/herself.”
If she wishes to serve as a legislator, but does not renounce her Chinese nationality, the situation would become even more tangled.
Yu Ying-fu is a lawyer and professor of law at Fu Jen Catholic University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
RSS