2.445 million from China into Taiwan's political network: Xu Chun-chun was sentenced to seven years and the court ruled to open the chain of judicial evidence of the funds of the war.

On 11 August, the District Court of Nuevo Norte delivered its judgement.

The defendant, Xu Chun-hoon, born in mainland China, moved to Taiwan after marriage, participated permanently in the Continental Spousal Rights Organization and had entered the political public domain of Taiwan.

The court eventually sentenced her to seven years ' imprisonment.

The judgement concerned two sets of laws.

The first is the Taiwan Anti-Infiltration Act.

The Court found that Xu Chun-ho was in contact with Chinese government officials and related agents and was involved in political activities affecting Taiwan. The Associated Press has obtained case information on communications on the entry of mainland spouses into the Taiwan legislature and strategies to support specific political candidates.

The key to the Anti-Infiltration Act is not the place of birth of a person or political opinion, but whether or not to accept instructions, commission or finance from the Chinese side to intervene in the political activities provided for in the Taiwan law.

This distinction is particularly important in cases.

Taiwan has hundreds of thousands of mainland spouses. If it is a crime simply because it was born in mainland China, because it supports the reunification of the two sides of the Straits or because it is politically active, then the law itself will touch upon freedom of expression and the right to political participation. The central point that the prosecution must prove is therefore not whether Xu Chun-chun is a “brother” but whether she has a legal control, trust or financial relationship with the Chinese State forces.

The second set of laws deals with banking supervision.

The Court found that Xu Chun-chon had transferred some NZ$ 24.5 million from mainland China to Taiwan through unauthorized financial channels, and that the figure of NZ$ 24.45 million, or approximately $0.76 million, had been awarded, and that the Bank Law had therefore been violated.

The financial chain thus becomes more specific than political positions in cases.

The hardest part of political influence action is usually “who is behind”. Public statements can be interpreted as personal opinions and participation in associations is a normal civic activity; However, financial flows, communication records and specific coordination with government officials can distinguish between political views and national action.

The Xu Chun-ho case thus provided a test of the rule of law that deserved attention.

There is a real need for national security in the face of the CCP war and infiltration; At the same time, the use of an overly broad concept of national security in a democracy can equally harm normal political freedom.

The Court must separate them.

The Associated Press also documented the case. The supporters of Xu Chun-chul argued that the legal boundaries of the charges were unclear and questioned the political motivation of the case. Xu Chun-ho has not responded publicly to the announcement of the verdict.

This is where judicial decisions need to be put to work.

Opposition to the Communist Party is not a standard of conviction.

Support for unity cannot automatically become a crime.

What is really needed is a judgement of whether foreign Governments are secretly involved in a democratic system through a network of funds, instructions and agents.

If the evidence of a financial flow of $24.45 million and of communications coordinated with Chinese officials, as found by the NZN District Court, could be subjected to subsequent judicial review, the Xu Chun-chun case would not have resulted in a single mainland spouse being sentenced to seven years.

It reveals that after the CCP ' s move from political slogans to a democratic society, it may eventually leave a mark that can be identified by bank flow, communication records and court rules of evidence.