Graphic content online deemed legally permissible
In a recent turn of events, Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen has come under scrutiny for reporting a viral graphic suggesting year-end bonuses of NT$40,000 for residents to the police. The graphic, which has been circulating online, is not an official policy or announcement but an academic call for the government to return surplus funds to residents.
The graphic, featuring an image of Mayor Lu pointing to a blackboard with the message about the bonus, has sparked debate about freedom of speech and the interpretation of the law. According to Article 63 of the Social Order Maintenance Act, spreading rumors that could undermine public order and peace could result in detainment for up to three days or a fine of up to NT$30,000. However, the Changhua District Court's judgement No. 147 requires such rumors to cause actual fear, panic, or disturbance. The graphic, which has caused excitement and anticipation rather than fear or panic, does not meet this threshold.
The use of the word "urge" in the graphic indicates that the measure has not been implemented by the Taichung City Government. This, coupled with the fact that the graphic does not contravene any laws, raises questions about whether Mayor Lu is attempting to instill fear and restrict Taichung residents' freedom of speech.
It is important to note that the reporting of the graphic to the police led to citizens being investigated. This incident reflects a misunderstanding or over-application of the law, rather than a targeted suppression of free expression. The editorial context confirms the graphic was a call for policy action, not misinformation purposely intended to disrupt social order.
Taichung City has a surplus of NT$12 billion, fueling the public's support for the idea of the cash handouts. Some members of the public have expressed support for the idea, stating that it could help relieve residents' hardships. However, the city government has not made any official announcement regarding the distribution of the funds.
Despite the controversy, it is crucial to uphold the principles of freedom of speech and maintain a balanced approach to the spread of information. The academic call for the distribution of NT$40,000 cash handouts to residents is not considered "spreading rumors" as defined by the Social Order Maintenance Act. It is a suggestion, not a factual statement of government action.
In conclusion, while the reporting of the graphic to the police has raised concerns about freedom of speech, it is essential to consider the context and the intent behind the action. The graphic, while exciting, does not meet the criteria for undermining public order and peace as defined by the Changhua District Court judgement No. 147. It is a call for action, not misinformation intended to disrupt social order.
[1] [Source 1] [2] [Source 2]
In light of the controversy, it's essential to examine the politics surrounding the report of the graphic suggesting year-end bonuses for residents to the police. This incident highlights the potential clash between freedom of speech and the interpretation of the law, particularly in regard to Article 63 of the Social Order Maintenance Act.
Moreover, the reporting of the graphic to the police has potentially overshadowed the general-news story of Taichung City's surplus funds, leaving the public eager for an official announcement regarding the distribution of the funds, and the possibility of crime-and-justice issues arising from the investigation of citizens involved in the case.
