Article 103 of the Criminal Code states: “Any person colluding with a foreign state or its agent with intent that such state or other state start war against the Republic of China [ROC] shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. An attempt to commit an offense specified in the preceding paragraph is punishable. Any person preparing or conspiring to commit an offense specified in paragraph 1 shall be sentenced to imprisonment not less than three years but not more than ten years.”
Article 104 states: “Any person colluding with a foreign state or its agent with intent to subject territory of the Republic of China to such state or other state shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. An attempt to commit an offense specified in the preceding paragraph is punishable. Any person preparing or conspiring to commit and offense specified in paragraph 1 shall be sentenced to imprisonment not less than three years but not more than ten years.”
Advocating for China’s forced military unification with Taiwan clearly carries the intent of encouraging China to initiate war against Taiwan. It carries the intent to make the territory currently governed by Taiwan belong to China.
Both of these are serious crimes explicitly outlined in Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code: “Treason.” The acts do not necessarily need to be fully realized — it constitutes a crime so long as there is “intent.”
Within the regulations outlined in the “Treason” chapter of the Criminal Code, Article 115-1 states: “The offense set forth in this chapter shall also apply to offenses committed in Mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, or any hostile foreign forces, or to the agents thereof. The offender who violates any provision of this chapter shall be punished in accordance with such provision.”
Therefore, these regulations also apply to such acts committed within or involving China, Hong Kong, Macau and any hostile foreign forces or their agents.
Clearly, China’s intent to use military force to unify with Taiwan classifies it as a “foreign hostile force.”
Furthermore, “collusion” was legally defined in the 1984 Supreme Court Ruling No. 2364, which states that the communication of intent that defines collusion is not limited to prior planning — the communication of shared criminal intent at the time of the act also constitutes collusion.
Moreover, the method by which this intent is expressed does not need to be explicit. A tacit agreement between parties is also sufficient. In other words, the legal grounds for “collusion” could be established whether such an agreement occurs prior to or during the act, or is made explicitly or implicitly.
Making statements in support of China unifying Taiwan through military force — if done under the instructions of or in coordination with China’s “united front” organizations or their agents, or in an agreement to act as an internal accomplice — could be classified as having made an explicit or implicit agreement.
Thus, such actions constitute the offense of treason as defined by the Criminal Code.
Li Chin-i is head prosecutor at the Taichung Branch of the Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS