Prior to marrying a Taiwanese and moving to Taiwan, a Chinese woman, surnamed Zhang (張), used her elder sister’s identity to deceive Chinese officials and obtain a resident identity card in China. After marrying a Taiwanese, surnamed Chen (陳) and applying to move to Taiwan, Zhang continued to impersonate her sister to obtain a Republic of China ID card. She used the false identity in Taiwan for 18 years.
However, a judge ruled that her case does not constitute forgery and acquitted her.
Does this mean that — as long as a sibling agrees — people can impersonate others to alter, forge and use documents legally without consequences? Should not both women be considered coconspirators in Zhang’s case?
Zhang used her falsified Chinese resident identity card to enter Taiwan multiple times, contravening Article 212 of the Criminal Code, which states: “A person who forges or alters a passport, transportation ticket, exception permit, special permit; or a certificate, a letter of introduction, or the like concerning the character, capacity, service, or other qualification of a person and causes injury to the public or another shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year, short-term imprisonment, or a fine of not more than NT$9,000.”
In many cases, crimes like this are committed for convenience or to find work, which might invoke some sympathy, which is why lawmakers specifically endorsed the penalties. Identification documents, diplomas, exams, certificates and vehicle registration plates are common items that are abused in such cases.
Zhang used a forged Chinese ID to trick officials in Taiwan, ultimately obtaining a national ID card. Deceiving a public official using false documents undoubtedly falls into the scope of Article 214 of the Criminal Code, which says: “A person who causes a public official to make in a public document an entry which such a person knows to be false and causes injury to the public or another shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than three years, short-term imprisonment, or a fine of not more than NT$15,000.”
Could it be that the law does not apply in Zhang’s case?
Wang Chih-shao is a political consultant for the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS