Taipei: The Taiwan High Court has overturned a previous ruling and convicted two individuals for organizing Beijing-funded trips to China, sentencing them to prison for election bribery offenses. The convicted individuals are John Yao, a ward chief in New Taipei's Tucheng District, and Ann Chein, head of the Youthex Organization, which promotes youth cultural and arts exchanges across the Taiwan Strait.
According to Focus Taiwan, the High Court sentenced Yao to two years and six months in prison and Chein to four years and eight months. Both individuals have also been stripped of their civil rights. The court's decision is subject to appeal. Investigators revealed that Chein received funding from the Nanjing Municipal Taiwan Affairs Office in September 2023 and enlisted Yao to recruit five ward chiefs and nine relatives for a group trip to China in November of that year.
The delegation, comprising 14 members, traveled to Nanjing and Huai'an in Jiangsu Province. During their stay, they were provided with free accommodation and meals, though each participant paid NT$16,500 (approximately US$526) for airfare. Banners reading "Both sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family" were displayed at banquets, where officials from the Taiwan Affairs Office advocated cooperation between Taiwan's opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People's Party. Investigators indicated that these activities aimed to sway Taiwan's presidential and legislative elections scheduled for January 2024.
The New Taipei District Prosecutors Office had indicted Yao and Chein in 2024 for violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act and election laws. However, the other ward chiefs and relatives who participated in the trip were not charged. Initially, the New Taipei District Court acquitted Yao and Chein, citing insufficient evidence to prove bribery intended to influence voting behavior. The prosecutors subsequently appealed the decision.
The High Court's ruling on Thursday reversed the initial acquittal, concluding that the defendants engaged in election bribery by accepting funds from an infiltration source, thereby offering improper benefits to eligible voters to sway their voting choices or dissuade them from voting. The court has yet to provide detailed reasoning for its decision and sentencing.