"Anti-Infiltration Act" in Full Swing
The Storm Media Editorial, December 18, 2023
"Taiwan under my leadership would be a friend of China, instead of an enemy," said Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairman and presidential candidate William Lai in an interview just a month ago. Ironically, prosecutors are vigorously questioning and searching village chiefs who recently made trips to mainland China under the "Anti-Infiltration Act." If Mr. Lai is elected, how would cross-strait relations continue? Will cross-strait tourism need to be halted? Will the Ministry of Transportation abrogate the policy announced earlier to allow cross-strait group tourism next year?
In Election Year, Village Chiefs who that Travelled to Mainland in Storm's Eye
After three years of frozen cross-strait exchanges due to the pandemic, Taiwan has resumed exchanges with mainland China for academic and individual traveling. The enthusiasm for village chiefs to travel to the mainland has gradually been restored. However, due to the upcoming presidential and legislative elections early next year, "village chiefs traveling to mainland China" has unexpectedly become an object for the Ministry of Justice to combat bribery and prevent "foreign forces from intervening in the elections." Earlier this month, the Taiwan Taipei District Prosecutors Office held a press conference on anti-bribery, where Minister of Justice Tsai Ching-hsiang was set to cite cases, stating that the influence of hostile foreign forces, gambling networks, and fake information are considered major investigative targets in the coming elections. He urged the public to avoid receiving "instructions, commissions, or funding" from foreign forces to avoid legal repercussions.
The case Minister Tsai cited involves a group of 36 people, with 22 individuals being summoned and the group leader posted bail at NT$150,000 (about US$4,843). And recently, 41 village chiefs from Taipei were summoned and searched. This is no longer an isolated case. Village chiefs who traveled abroad this year may become targets of investigation by prosecutors, possibly even facing a more severe charge of "election interference" rather than just "bribery." Even if the village chiefs were indicted by prosecutors, the final decision of the court would still be uncertain. However, there is no doubt that such actions have imposed tremendous pressure on village chiefs and cast a shadow over our nationals engaging in cross-strait exchanges.
At the inception of the "Anti-Infiltration Act," the opposition parties denounced it as the "green terror." Unfortunately, the DPP, through strong mobilization, recklessly pushed it to the second reading and completed the third reading within a month. In the past three years, a total of four cases were prosecuted under this law, with three involving village chiefs. They were found guilty because they received COVID-19 rapid test kits during their trips to mainland China, a situation that is both lamentable and disheartening.
"Foreign Forces," Proper Noun of Communist China, Has Become Popular with DPP Administration in Taiwan
The term "foreign forces," originally stipulated in Communist China’s constitution, has now become a popular expression under the Tsai administration. It eventually transformed into a legal concept used to restrict people's freedom of travelling. The criteria for violating the "Anti-Infiltration Act" include receiving instructions, commissions, and funding, which are coded in the "Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Act" and the "Public Officials Election and Recall Act." The legislative intent of the acts is primarily to regulate various levels of "election officials" and prevent them from publicly speaking, endorsing, appearing on platforms, making public statements, distributing promotional materials, displaying advertisements, using media, participating in fundraising, campaigning, and expressing support or opposition on certain candidates, covering almost all campaign activities to maintain the neutrality of election officials. The "Anti-Infiltration Act" simulates the regulation of election officials as a standard to the general populace, aiming to restrict individuals who may be influenced by "foreign forces" from participating in various election-related activities.
In other words, village chiefs who have travelled to mainland China recently will face a high risk of violating the laws if they are involved in campaign activities. In fact, the probability of "receiving instructions or commissions" is nearly zero since they have no direct contact with high-ranking officials from the Taiwan Affairs Office of the mainland’s State Council. Theoretically, they would not violate the "Anti-Infiltration Act" as long as they do not engage in campaign-related activities. But they may still face legal scrutiny if they publicly promote a specific candidate. Therefore, when Taiwanese travel to the mainland in non-election season, there is no specific issue of "receiving instructions, commissions, or funding" for a particular candidate, similar to Taiwan providing subsidies to attract foreign tourists.
Taiwan Can Subsidize Foreign Tourists, But Mainland Cannot Host Taiwan Village Chiefs
In Taiwan, village chiefs serve as crucial grassroots supporters in various elections. The recent extensive summoning and searching of village chiefs by the prosecutors’ office can be seen as a measure to restrict their campaign activities in the coming month. Most controversially, prosecutors confiscate their mobile phones. Even if these phones are indeed evidence, is there a justification for withholding them for a month? In essence, this action restricts the communication freedom of village chiefs during the election period. It raises questions about whether prosecutors intentionally seized the phones to prevent them from mobilizing support for specific candidates. Regardless, such actions are not considered normal and violate the rights to communication freedom in any democracies.
Village chiefs are the true "grassroots" of Taiwan's democracy, elected through village elections to manage local public affairs, as stipulated by the "Local Government Act." However, they are not defined as "government employees" under the "Public Functionary Service Act." Government employees, whether traveling for tourism or official exchanges, are required to report or obtain approval for visits to mainland China, but village chiefs are exempt from such requirements. If the DPP government deems it is necessary to further restrict village chiefs from traveling to the mainland for tourism, it should enact legislation to specify these limitations. If the restrictions are only applicable during the election period, the Ministry of Justice should notify village chiefs in advance, prohibiting them from traveling to the mainland within a year. If the government believes tourism to the mainland is a major concern for national security, the consideration should not be limited to controlling village chiefs but should instead be expanded to entirely severing cross-strait exchanges. Otherwise, when scholars and government officials are allowed to receive hospitality during their visit to the mainland, why are village chiefs the only ones singled out?
The old saying "To kill without teaching is called cruelty, to require without warning is called tyranny" finds its best illustration in the pretentious application of the grassroots village chiefs as practice targets for wielding the sword of the "Anti-Infiltration Act" by prosecutors. It serves as the prime evidence of ruling with both "cruelty" and "tyranny." The grassroots village chiefs who have experienced questioning by prosecutors now fully comprehend the urgency of "taking down the DPP" and even turn against the DPP unswervingly. In this light, we mislabel those prosecutors as a tool of DPP in the election battle; in reality, they appear more like undercover agents – specifically tasked with stoking dissatisfaction with the DPP among the grassroots.