The Taiwan People’s Party has a two-year clause for its at-large seats in the Legislative Yuan, with eight legislators expected to resign in 2026. Among the nominees for a replacement is Li Zhenxiu (李貞秀), the Chinese spouse of a Taiwanese national. The question is whether she must give up her Chinese nationality.
This issue is simple in some ways and complex in others. The law clearly stipulates that individuals of foreign nationality cannot hold public office in Taiwan. So, according to the law, Li cannot hold public office. The issue becomes more complicated when considering this question: Are those holding People’s Republic of China (PRC) nationality considered foreign nationals? If so, how should one go about renouncing their PRC nationality?
One might argue that the preamble of the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC) (中華民國憲法增修條文) states: “To meet the requisites of the nation prior to national unification,” while Article 1 of 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) states: “This act is specially enacted for the purposes of ensuring the security and public welfare in the Taiwan Area ... before national unification.”
From these examples, it seems that those holding PRC nationality are not considered foreign nationals. However, these provisions present a false and unrealistic narrative — the reality is that some countries acknowledge that Taiwan — the ROC — is a country, while others acknowledge that the PRC is a country.
Many democratic states have indicated that UN Resolution 2758 does not involve Taiwan, and therefore does not preclude Taiwan from participating in international organizations. In other words, Taiwan and China are both countries — or, in the words of President William Lai (賴清德), they are not subordinate to each other.
The Nationality Act (國籍法) stipulates that “a national of the ROC who acquires the nationality of another country shall have no right to hold government offices of the ROC.”
Therefore, people must renounce their foreign nationality — Chinese included — if they hope to serve as a legislator. Article 3 of the Legislators’ Conduct Act (立法委員行為法) states that it is the responsibility of legislators to perform duties on behalf of nationals, and should therefore observe the Constitution and be loyal to the nation.
Additionally, according to Article 2 of the Oath Act (宣誓條), legislators are required to take the oath outlined in the act, including the content: “I do solemnly and sincerely swear that I will observe the Constitution, be loyal to the nation, and perform duties on behalf of nationals without playing favorites and committing irregularities, pursuing personal profits, taking bribes, or interfering in the judicial process. Should I break my oath, I shall be willing to submit myself to the severest punishment.”
To be loyal to the nation, however, could one really possess the nationality of another country? How can you truly be loyal as a foreign national?
It is entirely logical that legislators must first renounce foreign nationality before taking office.
However, if Li wants to renounce her PRC nationality, obtaining the necessary documents might prove difficult. Article 16 of the Chinese nationality law states: “Applications for ... renunciation of Chinese nationality are subject to examination and approval by the Ministry of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China. The Ministry of Public Security shall issue a certificate to any person whose application has been approved.”
In this situation, it is unlikely that the Chinese Ministry of Public Security would approve Li’s application and provide her with the documents to renounce her PRC nationality.
There might be a workaround: When Li takes her oath of office to become a legislator, she could publicly present a document indicating her intent to renounce her Chinese nationality. In fact, Article 9, Section 4 of the Nationality Act states: “A foreign national may be exempted from submitting a certificate of loss of original nationality if ... he/she cannot obtain a certificate of loss of original nationality for reasons not attributable to himself/herself.”
If she wishes to serve as a legislator, but does not renounce her Chinese nationality, the situation would become even more tangled.
Yu Ying-fu is a lawyer and professor of law at Fu Jen Catholic University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS