[quote=“Hartzell”]
But how can you be held to be in violation of your purpose of residency/stay for doing [i]legal activities[/i]? According to the law of nations, and all international precedent, this makes no sense whatsoever . . . . . . . . .[/quote]
But this is the basis of all lawmaking in Taiwan, as vague and open to interpretation as possible.
Priests deported for just consoling workers about the awful conditions they are working under (no right to take industrial action). Random foreigners deported for stopping by an election rally and being unlucky enough to get their photo taken. All the extra hurdles to get/extend visas around election time, the extra raids on cram schools etc. to reduce the foreign population at sensitive times. The KMT die-hards at your local police station who make daily visa extension policy simply on the basis of what foreigners are saying about Taiwan in the newspapers.
Of course it’s convenient to have laws that are vague, you can twist them to suit any purpose. The Chen administration either has found this too convenient to want to change it, or that the structure of the NPA is impervious to shifts in policy from above. It may be that the administration is reserving these powers in case the foreign population should turn on it, but myself I believe we are just seeing resistance to policy change in the rank and file civil service and police administration, who are behaving like the goon squads they were set up to be.
Sorry to play devil’s advocate here, but why is it foreigners feel the need to do anything political in Taiwan? As an American, if I am upset by Bush’s invasion of another country then I fire off letters and email to Washington. I did not come to Taiwan to change the politcial system or launch any other kind of change. If I wanted to do something like that then I think the first thing I should do is attain Taiwanese citizenship. And if that’s not possible, then the only logically alternative would be for me to either accept the system the way as it is or leave. It doesn’t bother me if foreigners can’t protest, vote, or whatever…just as long as they don’t stop me from leaving if I want to go.
[quote=“matthewh”]If exercising your rights to free speech is legal, and you can be deported for it. What other legal things can you be deported for ?
Ok, the law doesn’t specifically say that foreigners can protest, so they can be deported. It also doesn’t say they can take busses, can they be deported for that too ?
How come Taiwanese have the right to protest, but foreigners don’t ? Do any other democratic countries have a law like this ?[/quote]
There are commonly recognized distinctions between “citizenship rights” and “human rights” which the Taiwanese conveniently ignore.
The right to vote, hold public office, have an ID card, etc. are citizenship rights, and apply to citizens. The freedom of speech and assembly are human rights, and apply to everyone.
In the German Basic Law, this is quite clear. Taiwan law is based on German law, but of course most of the people in Taiwan don’t understand German . . . . . . so I guess perhaps that is the root of the problem . . . . . [laugh]
Good point Juba but then again in America it is legal to protest, isn’t it? I am also curious as to the ‘status’ of these protesters - are they foreign workers living in the U.S., foreign spouses, American citizens, or dual citizens?
I think we should look at common sense -
I go to a foreign country, I am told it is illegal for me to protest - I decide to ignore the law and protest, I am deported (or arrested, harassed, or otherwise abused)…whose fault is it?
[quote]I think we should look at common sense -
I go to a foreign country, I am told it is illegal for me to protest - I decide to ignore the law and protest, I am deported (or arrested, harassed, or otherwise abused)…whose fault is it?[/quote]
You are told wrongly. What do you do?
I was once stopped by a policeman in the UK on the grounds that I was acting suspiciously … by driving within the speed limit where no-one else did! (I saw him in my mirror.)
This was at a time when the British police had no power to conduct random stops. Do you think I should just accept some tossers view that going about my lawful business is somehow illegal, or should I stand on the law and insist on being able to go through life without police harassment?
Morons with their own agendas and nasty suspicious minds will always intimidate others if no-one stands up to them. Especially when dealing with sneaky foreigners with unpronouncable names, different complexions, and ways that are unfathomably different from our own.
Sorry, I appear to have strayed into the argument about Us foreign policy. But the question is the same one. Do you protest or do you let the men with guns decide what’s best?
[quote=“Vannyel”]I think we should look at common sense -
I go to a foreign country, I am told it is illegal for me to protest - I decide to ignore the law and protest, I am deported (or arrested, harassed, or otherwise abused)…whose fault is it?[/quote]
This misses the point entirely. There is no law in Taiwan which says that foreigners are prohibited from exercising their right of free speech.
If you don’t understand the difference between a law, implementing regulation, administrative regulation, interpretative letter, administrative sanction . . . . . . etc., etc. then perhaps you cannot grasp the real significance of my remarks. So I must repeat:
There is no law in Taiwan which says that foreigners are prohibited from exercising their right of free speech.
Hartzell - your orginal post said, “If we participate in an election rally, this is considered to be interfering in Taiwan’s internal affairs, then the NPA will deport us.” And now your last post says…“This misses the point entirely. There is no law in Taiwan which says that foreigners are prohibited from exercising their right of free speech.” So which is it?
You are right, I don’t understand the differences between “a law, implementing regulation, administrative regulation, interpretative letter, administrative sanction . . . . . . etc., etc.” However I have heard that it is against the law, whether correctly or incorrectly, for a foreigner to protest in Taiwan. It is also my understanding that there is a sign posted at AIT to this effect. So I don’t protest. I came here for a lot of different reasons but none of them include trying to change Taiwanese laws, world view, or tell anyone how to live. As I said earlier, if I don’t like it here then I will leave.
TMWC…I think my media law professor covered this very well when he said that arguing with an armed officer of law the unarmed protester, even when doing something perfectly legal will invariably lose. His advice was to cooperate then seek justice when the gun isn’t a part of the equation.
You really are a bit slow on the uptake. Hartzell has already said everything that needs to be said about this. If you still don’t get it, then all I can say is that your comprehension of the English language is not all that it might be.
Oh, don’t do that. I’m not an intellectual - but I do have to tell you that cops in the UK don’t carry guns. Here they do, and apparently that means that you’re not allowed to argue with their interpretation of laws that don’t exist.
Hartzell: German law? Does that mean that nothing is legal unless expressly legislated to permit? Does anyone here actually have a ‘right’ to freedom of speech other than what you expect because that’s what you’ve grown up believing in?
Personally I would say that for me, a foreigner, to be protesting Taiwan’s foreign policy could reasonably be viewd as interference. (Different for permanent residents?) Protesting someone else’s policy, when I just happen to be in Taiwan, is not a criticism of Taiwan and therefore ‘safe’. N’est ce pas.
What would be the situation if there were a rally for foreigners protesting ARC laws? The conditions under which we fulfil our legal contracts here are surely our issue as much as they are Taiwans?
Of course, this depends on how you look at the scope of “foreign policy” . . . . . . . since the ROC includes the Mainland, so of course that is not foreign policy, and since the Taiwan Relations Act is a US domestic law, and many of us are US citizens, so I don’t guess that Taiwan relations fall in the realm of foreign policy either !!!
How is the law in Manland China about the time frame for Taiwanese spouses to get their legal ID?
How is the law in Manland China for Taiwanese spouses’ working and living rights?
How is the law in Manland China for Taiwanese spouses’ treaty of international human right?
Will we see half Taiwanese and half Chinese from Mainland every street after 10 years if our government does what they hope for?
:?
Besides, the topic is about Interfering in another country’s internal affairs. I do not think Taiwanese and China is one country, but two countries, which are Taiwan and China. Therefore, this matter is not related to a counry’s internal affairs.
