萬國法律事務所

Ms. Liu, a Chinese national, recently posted on the social media platform TikTok, openly advocating for the military unification of Taiwan by China, stating, “China's military unification of Taiwan no longer requires any further justification.” and “The delay in military unification is unnecessary.” After receiving the report, the Taiwan National Immigration Agency (NIA) summoned Ms. Liu for questioning. It was determined that her actions violated the Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area. Consequently, on March 11, her family-based residence permit was revoked, and she was ordered to leave Taiwan within a specified period. Additionally, she was prohibited from reapplying for dependent-based residence in Taiwan for five years, in efforts to better safeguard national security and social stability. The NIA emphasized that any expression that violates legal boundaries must be strictly addressed in accordance with the law. NIA also reiterated that freedom of speech should not be misused to promote military actions for unification.
 
Dissatisfied with the NIA's administrative decision, Ms. Liu filed a request for the suspension of her deportation with the Taipei High Administrative Court. However, the court ruled that under Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, any advocacy of war is prohibited. Taiwan has incorporated this provision into domestic law through the Act to Implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The court found that Ms. Liu's actions—specifically, her dissemination of support for China's military unification of Taiwan via social media—amounted to advocacy for war. Moreover, her statements, once shared, sparked significant public controversy and unrest, exacerbating various confrontational sentiments and posing an objective threat to national security and social stability. After balancing her right to residence against the significant public interest in maintaining social stability, the court concluded that public welfare must take precedence. As a result, the request for suspension of execution of deportation was denied, and the court upheld the NIA's original decision.