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
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