On April 22, 2021, music teacher Chan Hui-ling (詹慧玲) was stopped and questioned in Taoyuan’s Jhongli District (中壢) by a police officer, surnamed Yeh (葉). When she refused to cooperate, she was thrown to the ground and arrested for obstructing an officer in carrying out their duties.
Chan filed a complaint against the officer, but the Taoyuan District Prosecutors’ Office declined to press charges. After Chan applied for a reconsideration, the Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office ordered local authorities to conduct a second review. Yeh was found guilty in the first trial of coercion by a public official and was sentenced to four months in jail, in addition to offenses against personal freedom by a public official, for which he received a further six months.
The case highlights the major problem with spot checks by police.
Police conduct spot checks to maintain social order — not for criminal investigations. As such, spot checks do not involve arrest or search warrants, and are not subject to stringent oversight. Many years ago, the only legal basis for spot checks by police was Article 11 of the Police Duty Act (警察勤務條例), which demonstrates the dearth of attention given to spot checks. It was not until the passage of the 2003 Police Power Exercise Act (警察職權行使法), following the grand justices’ issuance of Interpretation No. 535 in 2001, that clearer legal norms were laid for spot checks.
According to Interpretation No. 535, police cannot conduct arbitrary or random inspections regardless of time, location or individuals. There must be reasonable doubt that shows the person poses a risk to endangering public safety or order.
Furthermore, before carrying out a spot check, there must be reasonable grounds to believe the person constitutes a hazard or will cause a hazard. This principle is also laid out in the first item of Article 6 of the Police Power Exercise Act.
Based on Paragraph 1, Article 4 of the same act, when initiating a stop-and-check, police shall present their credentials showing their identity and state their intent. Furthermore, Paragraph 1, Article 3 of the same act states that the principle of proportionality must be observed.
If an officer were to conduct a spot check without following legal procedures — for example, basing their action on subjective feelings, such as they think the target is a stranger or acting strangely — did not inform the other person why they were targeted, or breached the principle of proportionality, etc., they have no legal basis on which to conduct the check. In such cases, based on Paragraph 2, Article 4 of the Police Power Exercise Act, people have the right to refuse to cooperate.
Since the crime of obstructing an officer in discharge of their duties as stated in Paragraph 1, Article 135 of the Criminal Code assumes that civil servants perform their duties in accordance with the law, resisting illegal checks is a legitimate self-defense, and it is not considered obstructing an officer in carrying out their duties. It is the police who might be breaking the law if they were to take a person into custody without proper authority, through coercion or after an illegal search.
Most people would feel intimidated or unsure of what the legal consequences would be if they refused to cooperate. They could take legal action after the incident, but by that time it would be difficult to collect evidence. It is rare for somebody to stand up for their rights in the manner like Chan did, leading to the prosecution of a police officer.
As the Police Power Exercise Act has been in force for nearly 20 years, aside from reviewing and amending legislation, police must strive to comply with due process and protect people’s rights when conducting random inspections.
Wu Ching-chin is a law professor at Aletheia University and director of the university’s Research Center for Criminal Law.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
World leaders are preparing themselves for a second Donald Trump presidency. Some leaders know more or less where he stands: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy knows that a difficult negotiation process is about to be forced on his country, and the leaders of NATO countries would be well aware of being complacent about US military support with Trump in power. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would likely be feeling relief as the constraints placed on him by the US President Joe Biden administration would finally be released. However, for President William Lai (賴清德) the calculation is not simple. Trump has surrounded himself
RSS