Had former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) not accused his predecessor, former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), of corruption in the Taiwan Intelligent Fiber Optic Network Consortium case in April last year, Hau’s loyal ally, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Yu Shu-hui (游淑慧), might never have retaliated by saying that Ko’s administration had granted improper floor area bonuses to the Core Pacific City mall.
Without that chain of events, the public might never have learned that Core Pacific Group chairman Sheen Ching-jing (沈慶京) allegedly sought to bribe Ko and his team to illegally increase the floor area ratio (FAR) for the mall redevelopment.
Public attention surrounding the Core Pacific City corruption case has long centered on whether Ko accepted bribes. However, we must remember that it takes two to tango.
Thirty years ago, Sheen seized control of two major state-owned enterprises — BES Engineering Corp and China Petrochemical Development Corp (CPDC) — and subsequently siphoned off their assets. That tells us everything we need to know, mainly that Sheen was cunning and insatiable, as only someone so deft could have spent years orchestrating the Core Pacific City gambit.
In the UK, then-British prime minister Margaret Thatcher privatized 33 national industries between 1979 and 1987 to boost efficiency and public revenue. In Taiwan, former vice president and KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) likewise made privatization of public enterprises a policy priority in 1993.
Sheen exploited this opening. By undercutting rival underwriters with rock-bottom commission fees, he won the mandate to handle government share releases in BES Engineering and CPDC. He then leveraged that process to quietly amass proxy votes, securing effective ownership by 1994 with little resistance. His web of political and business connections ensured that he faced no meaningful legal consequences.
Sheen also had his eye on other prizes — Yang Ming Marine Transport Corp and China Steel Corp — but a coalition of academic and corporate figures successfully resisted him.
Sheen never truly managed BES Engineering Corp or CPDC. Instead, he diverted their funds into speculative ventures, siphoning nearly NT$100 billion (US$3.31 billion) to build shopping malls and petrochemical plants in China, projects that yielded unimpressive returns.
From 2010 to 2018, Sheen persistently lobbied the Taipei City Government to increase the FAR for the Core Pacific City mall, courting Hau. Hau opposed raising the FAR from 392 percent to 560 percent, but negotiations resumed under Ko, even after a 2016 Control Yuan ruling upheld the 560 percent ceiling.
With the backing of Taipei City Councilor Angela Ying (應曉薇) — despite the project being outside her Wanhua District (萬華區) constituency — Sheen orchestrated about 30 meetings and allegedly exerted pressure through inappropriate means, including alleged payments to Ko’s aides. In September 2021, Ko’s administration approved the project, granting an FAR increase to 840 percent, which generated more than NT$40 billion in added property value.
From his audacious seizure of two state enterprises to his recent alleged attempts to coerce and bribe Ko for obscene profits, it is clear that Sheen is not just greedy, but also brazen. While Hau held firm, Ko caved.
While most Taiwanese work hard for modest livelihoods, Sheen is desperate to exploit the system. The judiciary must see through the smokescreen and stop him before he strikes again.
Jang Show-ling is an adjunct professor in National Taiwan University’s economics department.
Translated by Lenna Veronica Suminski
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS