Law a humanitarian crisis
The current situation regarding naturalization and loss of nationality in Taiwan is very clear, both according to the law and in practice: Non-nationals wishing to acquire Taiwanese nationality are required to first renounce their current nationality (Enforcement Rules of the Nationality Act, Article 8), while current nationals who acquire a foreign nationality may — but are not required to — apply to renounce their Taiwanese nationality (Nationality Act, Article 11).
In practice, the vast majority of nationals here are unaware of this discrepancy in the Nationality Act, because for the most part, Taiwanese nationals know that they can be dual nationals without losing Taiwanese nationality. However, they should be very concerned.
The act goes against the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. The 1961 convention requires that loss of nationality should be conditional upon the prior possession of another nationality. However, Taiwan’s act requires the certificate of stateless status to be submitted with the application for naturalization: A person must become stateless without prior possession of — or assurance of acquiring — another nationality.
This results in the horrible situation where a spouse who divorces during the naturalization process after having already renounced their original nationality is stuck in Taiwan as a stateless person. This is exactly what the UN Convention seeks to prevent, as people are left without the protection of any government.
There are many thousands who are forced to remain in the nation, unable to return to their country of origin; many are not even able to reunite with their families or children. Taiwan receives neither economic nor social benefits from these people and yet it is Taiwan’s own nationality law that exacerbates the problem and continues to cause undue harm and suffering.
Further, the law encourages foreigners to make decisions based on the quality of their country of origin, rather than their loyalty to Taiwan. US and European nationals who might want Taiwanese nationality refuse to apply because the price they pay is simply too high, while foreigners from less economically and socially developed countries are happy to make the switch.
According to government figures, since 1982 fewer than 30 nationals from the US and western Europe have acquired Taiwanese nationality, while more than 110,000 individuals from Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Myanmar and Cambodia have renounced their nationalities to become Taiwanese.
Is this the system the nation wants? One where people choose nationality based on economic benefits, rather than loyalty to Taiwan?
Here is a proposal for amending the act: Repeal Article 9. Allow other countries to determine when and if nationality should be revoked based on the acquisition of Taiwanese nationality, the same way Taiwan protects its own nationals in Article 11. Thousands of stateless people remain stranded in Taiwan today as a result of Article 9.
Let us call on the government to repeal Article 9 and end this humanitarian crisis immediately.
Edward Greve,
New Taipei City
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS