When retired army colonel Hsin Peng-sheng (辛澎生) was found guilty of spying for China, the prosecution was dissatisfied with his six-month prison sentence and appealed the case.
However, he was found not guilty by a court of appeal, and he has been acquitted again in a retrial.
The judges’ reasoning was that there are no facts or evidence to prove that Hsin developed a spying organization on behalf of China.
Unsurprisingly, the judges of the High Court’s Kaohsiung branch took a simplistic view and followed the letter of the law, because they are not worldly wise and do not know much about how such spying organizations are developed.
After coming into contact with the Political Work Department of China’s Central Military Commission, Hsin frequently accepted invitations to banquets, and even introduced his friends to personnel of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
Face-to-face meetings, building rapport and socializing regularly are how mobsters build their organizations. To make a good impression, the mobsters do a favor for someone, then that person introduces them to their friends — that is how the gang grows.
Whether Hsin was given any tasks to carry out should be thoroughly investigated.
Despite being a high-ranking officer, Hsin lacked the self-discipline to avoid suspicion of espionage, but instead repeatedly contacted the other side and accepted dinner invitations. Then, he got more people involved by “telling his friends about the good food.”
This obviously went beyond simple friendship or love for his compatriots. Rather, it was aimed at growing the organization by attracting other weak-willed people with military connections.
Thinking about it from another angle might make it even easier to understand. Nobody would think it appropriate for judges to accept dinner invitations from people involved in the cases they try in their courtrooms.
However, it would not be proper for them to meet and chat with such people, or even introduce them to other court colleagues or parties to the case.
Hsin’s case is no different.
Chen Chi-nung is a former reserve political warfare officer who works in the field of education.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS