The Yilan County Government’s zone expropriations in Luodong Township (羅東) has raised questions about their implementation, with suspicions falling on several county officials because of how they were able to expropriate land so easily.
According to the government, zone expropriation is development undertaken with the cooperation of the landowners, and yet land is often expropriated or rezoned irrespective of their wishes. Small landowners might not qualify for land compensation, or might only receive compensation in the form of cash.
In some cases, land expropriated through excess condemnation — private property taken for public use through condemnation under eminent domain of an area of land greater than needed for the immediate purposes for which the land is being condemned — is then auctioned off to consortiums or construction companies willing to offer high bids.
The practice opens up potentially huge profits from land development, and so often becomes a channel for government to raise funds and transfer interests between politicians, consortiums and developers.
Meanwhile, unscrupulous individuals would purchase large tracts of land before urban planning projects are announced to obtain at a low price land destined to become prime real estate. They can then make considerable profits with subsequent land use changes.
The Constitution guarantees private property rights, and says that the state, irrespective of the zone type of the land it seeks to expropriate, needs to comply with certain criteria if it is to forcibly expropriate private property: The expropriation must be for a clearly defined public interest purpose, to the extent strictly required by the undertaking, and no more.
Unfortunately, the Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例) in its current form is not fit for the purpose of ensuring the aforementioned guarantees, especially as Article 4 of the act essentially ignores or negates the scope and limits thereof stipulated in Article 3.
In addition, restrictions have been excessively relaxed, enabling the government to legally undertake excess condemnation of private land, and then tender the expropriated land out for bids to fill its own coffers.
Clearly, the legislation governing land expropriations has long gone beyond any principle of proportionality that might once have existed, and goes against citizens’ property rights.
Many Western nations have long stopped the use of excess condemnation, but the system is still favored by local governments in Taiwan.
Democratic Progressive Party legislators — including Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁), now the mayor of Kaohsiung, Lin Shu-fen (林淑芬) and Yu Mei-nu (尤美女) — have proposed a draft amendment to the Land Expropriation Act to achieve land justice and protect private property rights, as well as the right to subsistence, enshrined in the Constitution by abolishing the regulations governing zone expropriations.
The government should address these issues properly and abolish zone expropriation legislation, which has become corrupt and is unfit for purpose.
John Huang is chairman of the CTW Culture and Education Foundation.
Translated by Michelle Mitchell
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 last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
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