The Examination Yuan plans to revise the national examination rules by removing some physical examination requirements, for example the ones regarding height or tattoos of police force applicants, to bring it “in line with the times.” When the plans were announced, rank-and-file police expressed their frustration, saying that if there were no restrictions on height or tattoos, there could be police officers under 150cm or 140cm, or who have tattoos of dragons and phoenixes, looking like gangsters.
While police enforcement and criminal investigations rely on intelligence, rather than physical attributes, physique definitely has an effect on the ability to perform on the front line.
WHAT THE JOB DEMANDS
I remember some years ago at the Taoyuan Precinct’s criminal section, we had a burly police officer, who was taller than 180cm. Whenever we launched a spot check at an entertainment venue, I would instruct him to stand at the door of each room with his arms folded and his eyes fixed on the customers. We would not hear a single complaint from anyone, not even from those with a few drinks in them.
Previously, highway police were required to be of a height of 170cm or taller. At that time, a squad was responsible for about 100km section of the provincial highway, so it would often be the case that a police officer was on duty alone in the remote areas. It would not be suitable for a person of slight build to be out there on their own. The port police also must deal with big and tall foreign sailors. Members of the military’s honor guard need to look imposing to make the right impression.
POLICE OR GANGSTER?
The police are there to enforce the law. How ridiculous would it be if they have tattoos on their arms, necks or, heaven forbid, faces? If an Examination Yuan member had a dispute with someone and went to a police station, only to see that the police officer handling the case had a duck tattooed on one side of his neck and a leopard on the other — the pronunciation of duck and leopard together can be the metaphor for yaba (鴨霸), meaning “bully” — who could say that officer had not once belonged to a gang? If the officer had his arms tattooed with characters like “love, hate, affection and enmity” (愛恨情仇), would he not wonder what trauma the officer had before, and whether he was mentally healthy or capable of solving problems?
In Taiwan, the use of guns by the police is controlled in many ways. To stop a street incident, police officers usually rely on their physical strength. Can a police officer with a slight build and short of stature be expected to get involved in this kind of situation? A significant percentage of police officers are female. Would their supervisors be comfortable with them getting involved in physical altercations with criminals in the dead of night?
On the other hand, if female officers are only allowed for office duty, not field work, what does this mean for gender equality? Besides, police workforce is already insufficient. In the face of large events or major incidents, when the police force could be stretched to the limit, is it still possible to divide officers into office duty and field work?
The Examination Yuan exists to solve problems, not to create them. To make such a big change in the rules, why does it not first try to understand the grassroots police units? It is merely making the change behind closed doors under the wrong-headed impression that these changes are somehow progressive.
Teddy Su is a civil servant.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS