Forging documents is no small matter and is highly related to fraud offenses, starting with the Keelung civil servant incident.

The director of the Keelung City Civil Affairs Department, Zhang Yuanxiang, recently admitted to violating the Personal Data Protection Act and the criminal law regarding the forgery of documents, and has been granted permission to resign. According to media reports, Zhang allegedly used his authority to unlawfully access the household registration system to extract personal data from the public, which was used to create a petition for the recall of specific council members. If this case is verified, it is not just a general administrative error but could involve deeper legal issues.

Forgery is closely related to the crime of fraud.

Firstly, forgery is not only a form of deception, but its essence is often highly intertwined with fraud. According to the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of China’s statistical analysis of cases related to “Forgery of Documents and Seals” (from 2017 to October 2022), among 58,249 individuals suspected of crimes, as many as 72.8% were also involved in other crimes, with fraud being the most prevalent, accounting for 38.7%. These data indicate that in practice, forgery is often just a part of a larger fraud structure.

Forgery is often used to achieve fraudulent purposes.

Some people in society mistakenly believe that “forging documents is just helping others write them.” This kind of thinking is very dangerous. Let’s consider a few scenarios: If someone forges a housing contract and registers real estate that originally belonged to you in someone else’s name, this is a typical case of fraud; if someone forges a marriage certificate claiming to have a spousal relationship with you, this infringes on personal identity and autonomy, and may even involve perjury and violation of personal freedom. These examples illustrate that document forgery often does not exist in isolation, but serves as a tool for further fraud, property theft, and deprivation of rights.

Does political petition forgery constitute fraud?

Returning to the Zhang Yuanchang case, although it currently only involves forgery and violation of the Personal Data Protection Act, if the purpose of his actions is to mislead the competent authority into believing that the number of signatories meets the standard, thus initiating the recall procedure, it may actually constitute fraud under Article 339 of the Criminal Code or election offense under Article 98-2 of the Election and Recall Act. Whether it constitutes a crime still needs to be clarified by the prosecutors and investigators. Keelung City Mayor Hsieh Guoliang also pointed out that although the statutory penalty for forgery is less than five years, if the identity of the public servant is aggravated, the penalty can be increased by one half, which should not be taken lightly.

Although the Zhang Yuanxiang case currently only involves forgery and personal data laws, if the purpose of forging the petition is to mislead the competent authority into believing that it meets the legal threshold, thereby affecting the legality of the recall process, it may also constitute fraud or obstruction of voting. ( Note: After the incident broke out, Zhang has already resigned, and whether it constitutes fraud or other criminal facts needs to be investigated by the prosecutors and investigators. )

City Councilor Miao Boya also stated in a media interview that today it’s forged documents, tomorrow it will be forged ballots! In a democratic society, we must respect the rules of the game.

The gap between social perception and legal reality

It is worth noting that the KMT has repeatedly stressed the need to severely punish the recall of co-signers for fraud, and legislator Weng Xiaoling has publicly stated: “In the future, as long as there are relevant persons who co-sign fraud, they will be punished with fixed-term imprisonment of up to five years, criminal detention and a fine of up to 1 million yuan.” However, the party’s local party departments have frequently been involved in cases of dead signatures and forged documents, causing a serious contrast in social perceptions.

The system of integrity is the foundation of a democratic society, and the documentation system is the core mechanism that guarantees citizens’ basic rights, the distribution of public resources, and the legitimacy of the rule of law. If the act of document forgery is taken lightly, it will cause the credibility of certificates such as ballots, academic qualifications, property, and identity to be lost, leading the entire society into a collapse of trust.

Addressing the high overlap between forgery and fraud is an important step towards a sound legal system. Any public officials involved should be treated more strictly to uphold administrative ethics and democratic legitimacy. This incident deserves high attention from the entire society and calls for political parties and government officials to consistently implement the rule of law, without just making empty statements.

This article discusses that forgery is no small matter and is highly related to fraud, starting with the Keelung civil servant incident, which first appeared in Chain News ABMedia.