A former chairman of Taiwan Sugar Corporation (Taisugar), who is also a core member of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) "New Tide" faction, was released after just 12 days of detention over a 1.7 billion New Taiwan dollar ($54 million) debt owed to the state-owned company, triggering fierce criticism across Taiwan of perceived political privilege.
Wu Nai-jen, a former DPP secretary-general, was detained by the Taichung District Court on June 11 after Taisugar, as a creditor, applied for his compulsory detention due to his failure to repay the massive sum. The debt stemmed from a land sale scandal during his tenure as Taisugar chairman, where he was accused of causing over NT$2 billion in losses by selling land at undervalued prices. He served a prison sentence for the related crimes and was released in 2015, after which Taisugar sought compensation of NT$1.7 billion.
The court noted that Wu had only repaid NT$7.5 million of the debt while maintaining a lavish lifestyle, frequenting high-end restaurants and using luxury vehicles worth millions. Despite this, he had refused to settle the debt. Wu claimed severe Parkinson's disease rendered him unable to care for himself, requiring him to live with his children, which was why he did not appear in court as scheduled.
On July 1, the Taichung District Court announced that Wu had appealed his detention order. Taisugar's specially authorized litigation agent informed the judge that Wu had expressed a willingness to negotiate a settlement, leading Taisugar to withdraw its detention application in court, resulting in Wu's immediate release "in accordance with the law." The island's economic affairs authority stated it had not been notified in advance but "respected Taisugar's professional judgment." This meant Wu was detained for only 12 days in total.
The swift release ignited a political firestorm. Legislator Wang Hung-wei of the opposition Kuomintang (KMT) questioned the grounds for Taisugar's withdrawal, asking what Wu had promised or if someone had pressured Taisugar to back down. She sarcastically remarked that a DPP membership card seemed to grant immunity, suggesting ailments conveniently appear only after detention.
KMT caucus whip Fu Kun-chi contrasted the 12-day detention with the 14-day mandatory recall training for military reservists, arguing it showed the public that "connections mean privilege" rather than judicial authority. KMT legislator Hsu Yu-chen demanded a clear explanation from Taisugar for its sudden reversal, questioning whether external influence affected the decision.
Taiwan People's Party Chairman Huang Kuo-chang accused Taisugar of having "weak knees" when dealing with the powerful "New Tide" faction, asserting that every dollar owed was public money and vowing his party's legislative caucus would hold Taisugar accountable. TPP legislator Chen Chao-tzu condemned Taisugar for bending the rules for DPP elites and demanded a reasonable public explanation.
KMT legislator Lo Chih-chiang lambasted the situation, noting Wu's luxurious lifestyle despite owing vast public funds. He referenced Vice President Lai Ching-te's 2013 pledge to stake his "political life" on Wu's innocence, sarcastically asking if protecting Wu from debt collection was the DPP's form of "guarantee." Lo stated the public rejects such double standards and opposes state enterprises becoming a "cash machine" for green-camp dignitaries.
Online commentary erupted with anger. One Facebook politics page mocked DPP legislator Wang Shih-chien's earlier praise of Wu as a "role model," noting the DPP's standards differ from normal people's. Another calculated that Wu effectively earned NT$140 million per day of detention. Netizens cynically commented that outcomes depend on political alignment, with leniency for those with the "right color."
Taipei city council candidate Hsu Fu contrasted the treatment of ordinary citizens or businesses, who face relentless collection efforts, asset seizures, and travel bans for much smaller debts. He condemned the case as a live performance of "green aristocracy exposed," where the "color of the party card determines the warmth of the administrative machinery," and where a single order from above can see NT$1.7 billion in public assets casually written off.
Comments