EDITORIAL: China cannot silence free speech

Prosecutors on Sept. 29 indicted two men for allegedly throwing feces and paint at the Comedy Club in Taipei on May 29. A 33-year-old man surnamed Liu (劉), allegedly acting on instructions from an unidentified person in China, recruited a 35-year-old man surnamed Kuo (郭), who threw bags containing human feces and white paint inside and outside the club in Zhongshan District (中山), prosecutors said.

The incident happened on a night when comedian Huang Yi-hao (黃逸豪), who had mocked Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), was scheduled to perform.

Property was damaged, staff were frightened and some customers sought refunds, prosecutors said.

It was an act of Chinese “transnational repression” intended to restrict freedom of expression, they said, recommending that Liu be given a prison term of one year and 10 months, and Kuo one year and eight months.

China’s Taiwan Affairs Office denied knowledge of the incident and dismissed the accusation of transnational repression.

It was not the first time people apparently acting on behalf of Beijing have been accused of trying to intimidate or silence critics in Taiwan. In 2017, Hong Kong democracy advocate Joshua Wong (黃之鋒) was targeted by pro-China protesters, including in an alleged attempted assault, upon his arrival at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport.

In 2019, Hong Kong singer and democracy advocate Denise Ho (何韻詩) was splashed with red paint while speaking to reporters before a rally in Taipei to support the territory’s democratic movement.

Prosecutors identified the main suspect as a member of the China Unification Promotion Party.

Other Hong Kong rights workers have also faced harassment. In 2020, former Causeway Bay Books manager Lam Wing-kee (林榮基), who had fled to Taiwan, was splashed with paint at a Taipei cafe.

Security officials have said that attacks and vandalism targeting Hong Kongers and their businesses in Taiwan are suspected of being carried out under Chinese direction.

Beijing has also sought to pressure Taiwanese to conform to its “one China” narrative through legal and economic measures. In June 2024, China published 22 guidelines allowing its courts to try in absentia and sentence to death “Taiwan independence separatists.” Beijing has since threatened Taiwanese politicians, including Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Puma Shen (沈伯洋), and activists with prosecution, despite having no jurisdiction in Taiwan.

Taipei has condemned the measures as attempts to extend Chinese law into Taiwan and create fear.

Economic pressure is another avenue of intimidation. This week, TV host Kevin Tsai (蔡康永) attended a campaign event in Taipei for Shen, who is the DPP’s mayoral candidate for the capital. After Chinese social media users called for a boycott, Chinese electric-vehicle maker Leapmotor removed promotional material featuring Tsai, while Harper’s Bazaar China took down its interview with him.

These incidents show the potential consequences for Taiwanese entertainers and businesses that operate in China when Beijing interprets their political activity as support for “Taiwanese independence.”

Taiwan’s freedoms of speech and the press were hard won. After 38 years of martial law, restrictions on political parties and the press were dismantled, as Taiwanese fought for the right to criticize their government, challenge those in power and speak without fear.

Article 11 of the Constitution protects freedom of speech, while the Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized the importance of free speech concerning government and public affairs.

Political satire and making fun of politicians are generally lawful and strongly protected forms of expression.

Huang’s political satire of Xi and other politicians is protected by Taiwan’s constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. Taiwanese must not be intimidated into self-censorship. If fear of Beijing causes people to silence themselves, Taiwan risks surrendering the freedoms that distinguish its democratic system from the Chinese regime while encouraging further attempts at transnational repression.

That is why prosecutors and courts must continue to hold accountable those who use threats, violence or other criminal acts to silence others. Defending free expression does not mean allowing intimidation to go unanswered; it means ensuring that intimidation never determines what Taiwanese are allowed to say.

Ultimately, Taiwanese — not Beijing — will decide what can be said in Taiwan. The nation’s democracy is strong when its people exercise the freedoms they fought hard for, rather than allowing fear of China to dictate the limits of their speech.