On his first day in office, independent Hualien County Commissioner Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁) appointed his “ex-wife” Hsu Chen-wei (徐榛蔚) as deputy commissioner, provoking a storm of public debate.
The Ministry of the Interior (MOI) made the unusual move of immediately releasing a press statement to declare the appointment invalid.
Yet the Ministry of Civil Service, charged with implementing the Civil Service Employment Act (工務人員任用法), said that although it is illegal for an official to appoint a spouse as his or her deputy, the law no longer applies once the two are divorced.
The MOI then tweaked its stance, announcing that since the two were divorced, the appointment should be valid, unless the pair were still living under the same roof, which would violate the Public Officials Conflict of Interest Prevention Act (公職人員利益衝突迴避法).
The MOI deserves credit for its effort to find a legal basis to stop an appointment that would undermine the legal system. It must be said, however, that the ministry’s grasp of the law is a little weak if the best it can do is grope around for countermeasures whenever political hacks make a mockery of the legal system by abusing their powers and playing games with the law.
Everyone knows that fake marriages with immigrants are against the law — the crime in question being forgery. This is because civil servants then issue a false document, effectively colluding in a fictitious declaration of marriage.
Fu and Hsu finalized their divorce on Dec. 18, just before Fu took office.
It is obvious that the purpose of this action was to evade the appointment restriction imposed by the Civil Service Employment Act.
In reality, divorce is not just a matter of filling out a few forms. It involves practical matters such as dividing property and determining custody of children.
More to the point, there should be no cohabitation or common property after the divorce.
At his inauguration this month, Fu even addressed Hsu as his “taitai” (太太, wife) and praised her for marrying him in his time of difficulty and for standing by him.
It is glaringly obvious that the two are still in a husband-and-wife relationship and that their divorce was a fictitious claim that lead a public servant to issue an untrue document.
There can be no doubt that a fake divorce is a form of forgery, and therefore a crime under the law.
Furthermore, the purpose of this particular fake divorce was to evade the restriction on appointments laid down by Article 26 of the Civil Service Employment Act.
It was a conspiracy to secure the position of deputy county commissioner, a public position, for Hsu.
Prosecutors should take action to uphold the integrity of the legal system for the sake of the public good.
Instead of waiting for someone to file a complaint, they should take the initiative by investigating Fu and Hsu’s fake divorce and prosecuting the couple. Prosecutors are duty bound to fight crime by strictly enforcing the law.
Four years ago, then Taitung county commissioner Wu Chun-li (吳俊立) was removed from office after being found guilty on corruption charges in his first trial.
Upon being sworn into office, Wu had appointed his “ex-wife” Kuang Li-chen (鄺麗貞) as his deputy commissioner.
This was never investigated, however, because Wu lost his position after the (unrelated) corruption trial. Yet this, too, was an unlawful appointment following a fake divorce. As it occurred just four years ago, the statutory period for investigating the case has not yet expired. In fact, the two divorce cases can, and should, be investigated together.
It is to be hoped that prosecutors will take action now to deter shameless politicians from taking the electorate for a ride.
The restrictions on political appointments stipulated in Article 26 of the Civil Service Employment Act are basic conditions for combating corruption.
Those in the government should use every means at their disposal to uphold anti-corruption regulations.
Otherwise, Taiwan’s efforts to stop conflicts of interest will come to naught.
For the sake of the integrity of our legal system, the authorities should do all they can to prevent appointments that violate the law, while prosecutors should launch immediate investigations into these cases and prosecute all those involved.
Once a court of law has found a politician’s divorce to be fake, formally declaring it null and void, Article 26 of the Civil Service Employment Act will apply, and an appointment that is illegal will automatically become null and void, too.
Lee Ching-hsiung is a lawyer and former member of the Examination Yuan.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS