Media outlets are ablaze with accusations by the New Party that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) orchestrated a “heavy-handed” 6:30am search of the apartments of four of its members.
Investigation Bureau officers on Tuesday raided the homes of New Party spokesman Wang Ping-chung (王炳忠) and members Hou Han-ting (侯漢廷), Lin Ming-cheng (林明正) and Chen Ssu-chun (陳斯俊), confiscating documents and devices, and taking them in for questioning.
The reason was for allegedly collecting and providing intelligence to the Chinese Communist Party in violation of the National Security Act (國家安全法). Some are even suggesting that the raid indicates a return to the White Terror era from 1947 to 1987 during the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) authoritarian regime.
Those people are getting ahead of themselves.
Media reports are questioning the proportionality of the raid and suggesting that the DPP is abusing its power, because the New Party is small, much reduced from its peak. It has no representation in the Legislative Yuan and only has two Taipei city councilors.
Article 2.1 of the act prohibits people from “carrying on detection, collection, consignation or delivery of any confidential documents, photographs, information or articles, or developing an organization for official use of a foreign country or mainland China, for its militaries, party duties or other official organizations.”
Commentators are asking what access the New Party members would have had to important confidential information and how they could have passed it on.
The four were arrested in connection with an espionage case involving alleged Chinese spy Zhou Hongxu (周泓旭), who has sufficient evidence stacked against him to prove he violated the act, prosecutors say.
Whether the raid was justified or proportionate depends on the nature of the investigation and what the bureau already knows. This is information to which the public is not privy.
Other objections are that the officers forced their way into Wang’s apartment and that his lawyer was kept outside the room during the search, even though Wang was neither a defendant nor a suspect, while some are questioning whether the officers were guilty of procedural violations.
First, according to reports, Wang refused the officers entry for 40 minutes.
Article 132 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法) says: “If a search is resisted, force may be used, but such force may not be excessive.”
Second, according to Article 144, paragraph 2 of the code: “In executing the search or seizure, the premises subject to search may be closed to public and ... any person other than the accused, suspect or a third person ... may be prohibited to enter the premises.”
According to these passages, it could be argued that procedure was followed.
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesman An Fengshan (安峰山) on Tuesday released a statement, saying that “as everyone knows,” the New Party is a staunch advocate of the “one China” principle and an opponent of Taiwanese independence, and is promoting the peaceful development of cross-strait relations.
He then accused the “Taiwan authorities” of protecting “secessionist” forces and of using “all manner of tricks” to “wantonly suppress and intimidate” advocates of cross-strait peace.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
The New Party seems to have a loyal friend in the office. Perhaps there is more to the allegations than meets the eye.
In addition, if the New Party is so concerned about abuses of power, it might want to be careful what it wishes for.
In a vibrant democracy, it is appropriate that questions are asked and that the government is held to a high standard of oversight — but the White Terror era this is not.
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
China’s partnership with Pakistan has long served as a key instrument in Beijing’s efforts to unsettle India. While official narratives frame the two nations’ alliance as one of economic cooperation and regional stability, the underlying strategy suggests a deliberate attempt to check India’s rise through military, economic and diplomatic maneuvering. China’s growing influence in Pakistan is deeply intertwined with its own global ambitions. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative, offers China direct access to the Arabian Sea, bypassing potentially vulnerable trade routes. For Pakistan, these investments provide critical infrastructure, yet they also
RSS