MILKING A BULL:The head of an association that represents Taiwanese businessmen who fall victim to the Chinese said it looked like Chinese policy to prey on Taiwanese
By Chris Wang / Staff Reporter
An investment protection agreement between Taiwan and China would be useless if China remains a country that was not ruled by law, a Taiwanese businessman said yesterday, claiming his assets were illegally seized in China.
“The agreement, if signed, would be a ‘highway to hell’ for Taiwanese businesspeople,” said Shen Po-sheng (沈柏勝), 50, at a press conference at Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) headquarters, adding that Chinese companies had conspired with China’s judiciary to seize his wealth.
Shen, who first invested in Tianjin, China, in 1992 when he was in his late 20s, said all of his assets were seized by his Chinese partners the following year.
During the past 20 years, he said he has battled the Chinese government to no avail — until his attempted suicide in Tiananman Square in May 2009 caught the attention of the Chinese central government.
It was his second attempted suicide and third protest on the world-famous square since 2007.
Shen, who has not returned to Taiwan since 2004, eventually received a reimbursement of 16 million yuan (US$2.5 million), less than one-tenth of his initial investment of 180 million yuan, before coming back to Taiwan on July 2.
Beijing forced him to sign a reconciliation agreement and warned him against disclosing his experience to the media, Shen said, adding that he decided to speak out so everyone would know the truth.
The Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Taiwan Compatriots’ Investment was adopted in 1994, he said.
“However, at the end of the day, China is not a country ruled by law,” he said.
“Shen is one of more than 2,000 Taiwanese businessmen framed by Chinese every year,” Victims of Investment in China Association president William Kao (高為邦) said.
Shen was one of the lucky few who at least got some money back, Kao said, adding that most victims returned to Taiwan empty-handed.
“Having handled many victims’ cases, I can almost say that it is a Chinese policy to prey on Taiwanese businessmen and eventually annex Taiwan,” Kao said.
He challenged President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) cross-strait economic policy, saying that Ma’s attempt to create a win-win situation with an evil regime was “like milking the bull.”
Kao and Shen said the proposed investment protection agreement, which was ironically reported to be discussed in Tianjin in the seventh round of bilateral negotiation by the end of this year, would not address two important issues facing Taiwanese businesspeople — whether arbitration will be conducted in a third country and who will be in charge of implementing the arbitration results.
China’s track record shows that it is not a trustworthy country to shoulder this responsibility, Kao said.
The agreement should actually protect business investment and human rights and should not be signed before numerous cases like Shen are resolved, TSU Chairman Huang Kun-huei (黃昆輝) said.