Chinese dissident Chen Siming (陳思明) arrived in Canada on Oct. 5 after being granted asylum. For Chen, it could be considered a satisfactory conclusion after being stuck at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport for about two weeks after he refused to fly to China. For Taiwan, the incident shows the need to accelerate asylum law legislation.
Chen regularly commemorated the Tiananmen Square Massacre of June 4, 1989. He has been repeatedly arrested around the anniversary and imprisoned.
Chen, who arrived at the airport on Sept. 22 after passing through Thailand and Laos, refused to board his flight to China and sought assistance to resettle in a third country. He stayed in the airport’s transit area and immigration office.
There was a similar case in 2018, when two Chinese dissidents spent four months at the airport before flying to Singapore to obtain short-term humanitarian visas. In 2019, two other dissidents stayed at the airport and in custody for nine months before obtaining asylum in Canada. Chen is lucky to have been granted political asylum in Canada after only two weeks. He has shown gratitude for help from rights groups, as well as the governments of Taiwan and Canada, for handling his case quickly and in the spirit of humanitarian care.
However, his situation has returned focus on concern that Taiwan, which is considered one of the most progressive and democratic countries in Asia, has no asylum law or a formal refugee pathway. A draft asylum law was proposed by the Ministry of the Interior in 2005, but has never been implemented, mainly because the China factor makes it a politically sensitive and complicated issue. Espionage and constitutional issues over whether Chinese should be considered foreigners or nationals are among the concerns.
People from China, including Hong Kong and Macau, have their cases reviewed individually as stipulated by the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), and the Laws and Regulations Regarding Hong Kong and Macau Affairs (香港澳門關係條例). As for refugees or asylum seekers from other countries, there no legislation for proper or prompt management.
The government was limited to “special assistance” when a Ugandan was stuck in immigration limbo for seven years after escaping mistreatment for being gay. The government has also been criticized for offering only 30-day visa extensions for Ukrainian applicants and their relatives fleeing war. The world is turbulent with a worsening ecosystem and military conflict. China’s National Security Law has also prompted rights advocates to flee, with Taiwan a prime destination.
The nation should advance asylum legislation with a focus on promulgating it next year, following the timeline of its human rights action plan. Political hurdles can be solved by adopting a dual system for Chinese and asylum seekers from elsewhere, while there are ways to prevent espionage.
Given the success of the “Taiwan can help” campaign during the COVID-19 pandemic, more could be done to bring the country’s legal systems in line with international human rights norms and humanitarian principles.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS