Prosecutors on Wednesday launched an investigation into Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌). Huang has found himself subject of a string of allegations in recent months, mostly accusations of behavior considered below the level of an elected representative, and definitely which a political party leader is expected to remain above.
These behaviors betray a troubling pattern, as do his responses to them: denial, obfuscation, distraction, blame-shifting and accusations of political persecution.
If proved, Wednesday’s allegations are very serious indeed. While the investigation continues, no conclusions can be drawn, but we can look at an emerging pattern of behavior.
Political commentator Chang Ming-yu (張銘祐) filed a complaint on Tuesday accusing Huang of contravening the National Security Act (國家安全法) and the Criminal Code.
The complaint refers to allegations that Huang had removed classified documents from a confidential meeting of the Legislative Yuan’s Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee in which Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) provided details of the NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.6 billion) special defense budget involving US arms procurement and Taiwan’s weapons development and production.
Huang does not deny removing the documents. According to his account, he had accidentally mixed them together with other documents and that, as soon as he realized his error, within 30 seconds of leaving, went back to the room to return them.
Huang’s account of events was later questioned after surveillance footage showed that Huang had been outside of the room in possession of the confidential documents for over a minute and that part of the time had been in an area not covered by the cameras.
Other accounts say that, rather than Huang returning on his own initiative, a military officer was sent after him to fetch the documents when the committee chair realized they were missing.
All of this could be put down to partisan accusations, bred by a lack of trust between the parties. The issue is that Huang has a history of pushing the boundaries of legality and acceptable behavior and of providing accounts that are easily refuted.
In June last year, the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office launched an investigation into an incident in which Huang played a recording during a hearing of the Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee, purporting to be of a prosecutor harshly interrogating a suspect. When accused of having played confidential material in public, Huang said that he had never said the recording was from an actual interrogation and that it was just meant to be an “illustrative example” of a “threatening tone and insulting language.”
In September of last year, Huang was questioned by Taipei City police after a rally he had organized resulted in injuries to eight police officers, during which he had been seen with his arm around the neck of police officer Chen Yu-chien (陳育健). Huang produced a photograph of Chen smiling at the time as evidence that harm was neither meant nor done. It was later revealed that the photograph had been manufactured using artificial intelligence.
In November last year, Huang was involved in allegations that he had orchestrated a “paparazzi network” to dig up dirt on political rivals following a report by Mirror Media. His response was to divert attention and accuse the prosecutors’ office of colluding with media affiliated with the pan-green camp.
Blame shifting is another arrow in Huang’s quiver when responding to allegations of questionable behavior. During a livestream on Wednesday, talking of his “careless” removal of the confidential documents, he said that the committee staff “should have retrieved all the documents in front of legislators when we left the room.”
It is possible that Huang had made a genuine mistake when he removed the documents. Unfortunately, his past form of forced errors and flimsy conceits make it difficult to take him at his word and his consistent modus operandi of shifting blame and shouting persecution does not encourage trust.
Beyond the allegations of removing confidential materials involving national defense, Huang is seeking election for New Taipei city mayor. This should set off alarm bells, as a stint as mayor is generally regarded as a stepping stone for a shot at the presidency.
If he is willing to resort to such underhanded tactics and obfuscations when called out as the leader of a minor opposition party, what would he be capable of with his hands on the state machinery?
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS