Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) on Monday last week played an audio recording at a hearing of the legislature’s Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee to accuse a prosecutor of interrogating a suspect with a harsh tone. Huang later said the tape was an artificial intelligence (AI)-generated “demo tape,” triggering controversy over mixing fact with fiction to misrepresent judicial proceedings.
In the hearing, Huang questioned Minister of Justice Cheng Ming-chien (鄭銘謙) on the prosecutors’ improper interrogations of suspects and played what he called “an interrogation audio tape” that appeared to depict a female prosecutor harshly questioning a suspect, surnamed Chu (朱), who resembled Chu Yea-hu (朱亞虎), a defendant in the Core Pacific City (京華城) development project case who had confessed to bribing former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
When the minister warned that broadcasting material related to ongoing legal proceedings is illegal, Huang retracted his remarks and said the tape is “a demonstration tape,” without specifying its origin, to illustrate a harsh interrogation. Huang later told media that the tape was “an AI-processed piece” made by himself.
However, the tape released by Huang has been widely cited as “the prosecutor’s interrogation of Chu Yea-hu.” Even TPP-funded media and TPP members’ social media posts call it “evidence of improper interrogation of the Core Pacific city case’s defendant Chu.”
The party’s caucus deputy convener Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) also said that the tape is “a part of the prosecutors’ interrogation recording, which party members have heard several times.”
Huang’s tape has triggered heated controversy. The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office has launched an investigation into Huang’s tape on suspicion of misusing and counterfeiting investigation material to misrepresent ongoing legal proceedings. If the tape really is of an interrogation, Huang could have contravened the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法) by revealing classified materials from ongoing court proceedings and the Personal Data Protection Act (個人資料保護法) for violating the privacy of defendants.
On the other hand, if the tape actually is an AI-generated or fabricated piece derived from interrogation materials, Huang could have committed document forgery to misrepresent judicial and prosecutorial operations.
It should be further noted that Huang and the TPP have recently proposed an amendment to the Court Organization Act (法院組織法) to allow court proceedings to be broadcast live, which has aroused concern, and opposition from legal associations and civil rights groups.
To live stream trials is rare even among advanced democracies. The US, Germany and Japan permit video recording only under limited conditions. In Taiwan, the transparency of court trials has been and could be gradually advanced through documents disclosure, citizen judges and public observations. To broadcast trials without complementary measures would not only disrupt the legal process, but also put excessive stress on participants, jeopardize the privacy of victims and witnesses, and threaten fairness.
The Judges Association issued a statement questioning the source of Huang’s audio file, adding that such an approach could mislead the public, as well as suggesting that there is a risk of using congressional questioning to interfere with individual cases. Huang’s move has validated concerns that the potential live streaming of court activities could be misused and edited to manipulate public opinion and influence trials.
Huang’s tape has put the TPP on the verge of contravening the law by improperly interfering with the Core Pacific City case, and has caused harm to legislative discipline. More importantly, it justifies the ongoing nationwide recall of legislators who know the law, but willingly break it.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou Province, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS