Legal nightmare in Taiwan
For more than 15 years, I have called Taiwan my home. I worked as an English educator, building a life, a business and meaningful relationships here. However, since 2020, I have been trapped in a Kafkaesque nightmare at the hands of the judicial system — a nightmare that continues even after prosecutors have acknowledged that I did no wrong.
In 2020, I faced three separate criminal charges for briefly sharing a rental contract online. Despite presenting five defense witnesses and extensive video evidence — some of which was broadcast on national television — the courts ignored all exculpatory material. I was denied adequate legal representation and access to an interpreter, in clear contravention of basic rights and international norms.
After years of relentless court summones, emotional strain and financial ruin, I was forced to leave Taiwan late last year under threat of a six-month prison sentence and permanent criminal record.
The shock came just weeks ago. In April, the Ministry of Justice issued a statement confirming I had acted without malicious intent and caused no harm, essentially acknowledging that the original charges were groundless. Yet they are still upholding the original six-month prison sentence or more than one year of community service.
This is no longer a private legal dispute — it has become a textbook human rights contravention. The government, fully aware of its own procedural failings, continues to impose punishment on a foreign national without legal or moral justification.
The contradictions here are too glaring to ignore. How can a government claim “no harm” and “no intent,” yet still insist on punishment? How can a justice system acknowledge its own missteps, yet offer no apology, compensation or remedy?
Beyond my personal story, this case raises urgent questions about Taiwan’s international reputation, particularly how it treats foreign residents caught in its legal system, and what protections exist for due process, fairness and accountability.
What message does this send to the international community — especially to Taiwan’s allies and partners who expect it to uphold the values of a democratic society governed by the rule of law?
I have reached out to Canadian diplomatic authorities, human rights organizations and international media, but I believe people in Taiwan deserve to know about this injustice first.
I respectfully call on Taiwan’s judicial authorities to publicly acknowledge the harm caused by more than four years of wrongful legal pursuit, and to offer fair compensation for the financial, reputational and psychological damage incurred. I would also like to receive an official apology so I can begin the process of rebuilding my life and business.
This is not about revenge, but a call for resolution, accountability and the hope that no one — Taiwanese or foreign — will have to endure such a senseless ordeal again.
I share my story not only for myself, but in the belief that Taiwan can and should do better.
Ross Cline
New Brunswick, Canada
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS