Subscribe here

Taiwan announced that, effective March 19, non-citizens will be barred from entering Taiwan, and all travelers entering Taiwan must self-quarantine at home for 14 days.
(Photo from: United Daily News)

Taiwan Restricts Entry of Foreign Nationals to Contain Virus Spread

News Compiled and Reported by Taiwan Weekly

 

On March 18, Taiwan’s Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) announced that, beginning from 12 AM on March 19, foreign nationals will not be allowed to visit Taiwan. The restriction is due to a surge of imported cases of coronavirus disease (COVID-19).

 

Starting March 19, Taiwan has entered into a state of semi-lockdown. Foreign nationals are not allowed to enter Taiwan unless they hold Alien Resident Certificates, or documents proving they are in Taiwan for diplomatic or other official purposes, or to fulfill business contracts, as well as those who have received special permits.

 

The reason behind the new restrictions on foreign nationals is that the government failed to intercept two imported cases at the airport. Case 83, a French citizen, and case 95 arrived in Taiwan on March 12 and March 6, respectively. They were tested on March 16. On March 18, they were confirmed and hospitalized in the negative pressure isolation rooms.

 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on March 21 that there is no need for foreign nationals, who have already entered Taiwan with visa-waiver, landing visa or residence visa, to apply for extension of their visas if they are not overstayed. Visas of these foreign nationals are automatically extended for 30 days. But the total days of their stay may not exceed 180 days. This measure will be reviewed and adjusted accordingly as the pandemic develops.

 

On March 20, CECC also announced that, beginning from 12 AM on March 21, global travel alert will be elevated to level 3. Taiwanese citizens are advised to avoid unnecessary travel abroad.

 

As 18 new confirmed cases were listed on March 21 and 16 new cases on March 22, in order to contain the spread of coronavirus by imported cases, Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung, who heads the CECC, announced on March 21 that some 3,000 people, who have been to the United States and East Asian countries during March 8 to 18 and entered Taiwan and have visited a doctor for upper respiratory tract infection, were asked to quarantine themselves at home and receive testing for coronavirus.

 

As thousands of people, including Taiwanese students abroad, have entered Taiwan recently, CECC has relaxed the relevant regulations on subjects of coronavirus tests. Consequently, the average cases for test in a day (about 500 to 600) has doubled.

 

In the past, once an individual is tested, he must stay in a negative pressure isolation room in a hospital for at least three days. To prevent the negative pressure isolation rooms in the hospitals from being overcrowded, starting from March 21, those who do not have pneumonia and who need not be hospitalized by doctor's assessment, may go home for self-quarantine and await test results.

How Far Is Tsai Administration’s “Advanced Deployment” Ahead of the Virus?

United Daily News Editorial, March 21, 2020

 

In just one week, the global spread of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has undergone tremendous changes. This week, the number of confirmed cases in Taiwan doubled instantly from 53 to 135 with double-digit growth in two days. The first wave of cases in mainland China was mainly from Taiwanese business people, their staffs and family members in Wuhan. They are a little bit older. The second wave of confirmed cases began with a lady who had no history of travel at all. In addition, a number of care takers and visitors in the hospitals were infected.  As for the third wave of confirmed cases this week, almost all of them were related to overseas travel and work in Europe and the United States. Most of them were young people in their 20s and 30s.
 

From the perspective of these three developments, the source of Taiwan’s epidemic has shifted from mainland China to Europe and the United States, and even to Thailand, Japan, and the Philippines in Asia. The age groups of infected people in Taiwan have changed from the middle-aged and the elderly to younger people. Because of this, Taiwan swiftly decided to control the entry of foreigners across the board recently, strengthening the follow-up quarantine of the local people who had recently returned from Europe and the United States. Of course, the government was aware of the urgency of the epidemic. It sought to re-examine the shortcomings of current epidemic prevention measures, while mending the fences.

       

It is undeniable that the Taiwan’s efforts to prevent the epidemics over the past two months were indeed remarkable. Major reasons included the professional vigilance of frontline medical staff, the active and unremitting efforts of quarantine officers, and the public's high level of self-defense consciousness against the coronavirus. The administration’s command and decision-making process in epidemic prevention should be subject to stricter scrutiny.

 

For example, the Central Epidemic Command Center did not fully acknowledge the characteristics of the virus strain in the early stage of the epidemic. Instead of studying the possibility of "asymptomatic infection" or "mild infection", which may cause the sick person to be misdiagnosed as influenza, this Center focused too much on the investigation of personal travel history, Later, referring to Singapore's experience, Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung, who heads the CECC, tracked down a case of severe complicated influenza, and found out that a Taichung taxi driver had returned to Taiwan from coronavirus-infested mainland China. He had passed away when diagnosed positive and had transmitted the coronavirus to four family members. No sooner had the driver was diagnosed with the disease, than he passed away. While there were regrets, the CECC deserves recognition for blocking the hole in epidemic prevention.

 

Though the international media often praised Taiwan's epidemic prevention measures, there were still many issues to be discussed. For example: firstly, the release of 2.0 version of surgical face masks, which meant that the government was to monopolize the production and distribution of the face masks, was not satisfactory to the public; secondly, a middle school semester had been suspended due to the infection of three students, but our distance or online learning progress still seems to be far behind the preparation for a future large scale suspension; thirdly, a number of indigenous clustering cases, the sources of infection have not yet been clearly identified; and last but not least, it is noted that the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) still encourages anti-Chinese sentiments. As U.S. President Donald Trump denounced the disease as “Chinese virus,” were responsible officials worried that overseas Taiwanese could fall into the victims of racial discrimination in the United States? In this regard, what is the administration’s "advanced deployment" plan?

 

We could not see the light at the end of the tunnel regarding Taiwan's epidemic prevention operations. Of course, it is not time for Taiwan to be self-confidence and self-complacent. In the past two days, a large number of returnees flooded into arrival hall of Taoyuan International Airport. They were shoulder to shoulder, and the quarantine officers were still equipped with thin face masks; this scene was far from "advanced deployment". Imagine that even if these incoming passengers did not infect each other, how can those front-line quarantine officers face a large group of unspecified persons, how can no one assess the risks they may take? When the administration of President Tsai Ing-wen bragged about "advanced deployment", it is better to think about the distance between the virus and the general public. It is useless to race ahead of other countries. Overtaking the virus is the more prudent course!

Update: The number of confirmed cases is 252 on March 26.

 

From: https://udn.com/news/story/7338/4431667

Students, instructors, and staff in Taiwan's high schools and under are now restricted from traveling abroad, so as to prevent contracting the coronavirus disease (COVID-19).
(Photo from: United Daily News)

Current International Travel Restrictions on Students Contradict Law, Violate Constitutional Rights

By Lu Chi-Yuan 

The Storm Media , March 20, 2020

 

New Taipei City, Taoyuan City, and the Executive Yuan successively prohibited high school students and under from traveling abroad. However, public opinion suspects this is a violation of the people’s right to freedom of movement as well as a violation of constitutional principles. Premier Su Tseng-chang asserted that the sources of law for these measures come from “Article 7 of the Communicable Disease Control Act” and “Article 7 of the Special Rescue Act”. As all attention turns to the discussion of “Double Article 7”, the opposition party suggests a law amendment while the ruling party advocates the implementation of an emergency order when necessary.

 

These interpretations of “Double Article 7” are in fact misleading. From the perspective of the Executive Yuan, the purpose of Premier Su providing the “sources of law” is to justify the legality of the banning action; however, the “Double Article 7” is ambiguous and only seemingly applicable on the surface.

 

Unsurprisingly, discussion by critics and commentators have revolved around the “ambiguity of the regulation” and the “unclearness of authorization” when trying to prove that “prohibiting high school students from traveling abroad” is against the constitution. Because of the complex nature of law, the general public might not understand it, which could easily lead to the simplification of the discussion to either “support” or “reject” banning actions taken for epidemic prevention.

 

If the topic at issue is “whether or not high school students CAN be banned from traveling abroad because of the epidemic”, then one should look into both sources of law that may “authorize” or “prohibit” the Executive Yuan for taking these measures. If there indeed is a law that clearly prohibits the Executive Yuan from issuing this ban, then “Double Article 7” which vaguely applies in this situation, may fall into political chicanery. 

 

In fact, there is a source of law that “prohibits the banning of healthy individuals from traveling abroad”. Article 58 of the Communicable Disease Control Act states that authorities may restrict patients (including suspected patients) from departing the country, but when the patients have been restored to health, their exit restrictions are immediately abolished.

 

According to Article 58, banning all high school students from international travel is definitely against the law and its regulation is much clearer than Article 7. As a result, Executive Yuan’s justification in citing Article 7 is greatly weakened when referencing to Article 58. In the study of jurisprudence, there is the principle of “analogizing the heavier situation if such case shall be decriminalized” and the principle of “balance between crime and punishment”. For instance, if the law states that intentional homicide can only be sentenced to a maximum of ten years in prison, could public assault be sentenced to capital punishment? Certainly not. Since homicide, being a severer crime, is sentenced only to 10 years of imprisonment, public assault, a less serious crime, certainly shouldn’t incur a harsher punishment. 

 

Under the same logic, if the current law clearly states that “patients who have recovered cannot be banned from exiting the country” then according to the previously mentioned jurisprudence principles, there is no doubt that healthy people shouldn’t be banned to travel abroad. The Executive Yuan clearly has either neglected or purposefully overlooked Article 58 when justifying their actions by citing “Double Article 7”.

 

On another note, it does seem to be the consensus of the Taiwanese society to prohibit healthy people from traveling abroad in case they “possibly bring back the virus.” Therefore, it may seem that the government’s endeavor to secure the country is understandable. However, the truth is that Taiwan’s government still has to be under the regulations of the law and cannot turn a blind eye to precise law regulations.

 

When a beneficial action to the people is prohibited by the current law, the right path for a democracy is to amend the law as soon as possible. Contrarily, leaving the law unamended while forcibly applying an inapplicable law to justify one’s need may be an easy and popular trend, but it is still abnormal in essence.

 

From: https://www.storm.mg/article/2421623

Interview with former Premier Jiang Yi-Huah on Taiwan’s pandemic prevention measures

Courtesy of the WorldPost , March 25, 2020

 

The WorldPost’s deputy editor, Nils Gilman, interviewed Jiang Yi-huah, the premier of Taiwan from 2013-2014, on March 21.

Gilman: Tell us about the general situation in Taiwan right now in terms of managing the coronavirus outbreak. What’s the mood?

Jiang: For now, we are doing more or less OK. So far, we have 195 confirmed cases of coronavirus and two deaths, which is quite low, especially compared with surrounding countries and some in Europe. But people here are still scared.

We are not in a panic, but we do think the challenge could last a long time. People feel like they need to be better prepared for a long-term fight, so they go to the supermarket to buy as many things as possible — which is absolutely not necessary at this moment. But people are deeply worried about the future supply of their everyday needs.

Gilman: In the West, there is a perception that Taiwan has had exemplary success in handling the outbreak. Given that Taiwan is closely linked with China, both economically and in terms of transportation and geography, it is remarkable how successful Taiwan has been in containing the virus. What’s been the key to Taiwan success?

Jiang: There are several reasons. First, I think the experience of combatting SARS 17 years ago was important for Taiwan — not only for the government, but also for the general public. During the SARS epidemic, Taiwanese people were terrified: more than 300 people were infected by the disease, and the mortality rate was quite high, about 11 percent, so that within a few months 37 people died. Many people in that time, including me, were afraid they might lose their families and had to discuss how to survive. So when coronavirus disease came again, the general public and the government was not inexperienced. We knew how serious the problem could be. We were also ready to adopt tough measures to contain the disease.

The second factor is that, also because of the SARS experience, we have a great disease control and hospital service system in Taiwan. The doctors and nurses are well-trained in dealing with infected cases. Without getting into the details of the procedures, whenever we find a suspicious case, we have standard operating procedures for treating every case. We had two serious hospital infection accidents during the SARS outbreak, which caused the death of 10 medical workers. This time, the hospital system was more prepared.

The third reason for Taiwan’s relative success is its proactive measures — what the government calls an “early response” policy. The Central Epidemic Command Center decided soon after the outbreak that all mainland Chinese students (except degree students) and tourists were not allowed to enter Taiwan. It then ordered all public schools to postpone the start of classes until late February. Other measures — pervasive screening of potential patients, investigation of contact history, quarantine of people coming from infected areas and expropriation of all surgical face masks — were implemented faster than other countries.

Fourth, Taiwanese people are quite used to wearing face masks during an epidemic, which actually helps a lot in preventing the spread of coronavirus. I think it is a big difference from the United States and other Western countries. The use of face mask may be regarded as a sign of sickness in the West. But people here are wearing face masks to protect themselves from disease, and to make sure that the environment will be safe for everyone else as well.

Fifth, the Taiwanese government implemented tough measures to fight the pandemic: strict border control, encouragement not to travel abroad and surveillance of all suspected cases. Taiwan is close to mainland China, both geographically and economically. But at the beginning of the pandemic, the government ordered the cancellation of all transportation across the Taiwan Strait. Later on, we also closed the door to visitors and tourists from many other countries. The government restricts travel by many hospital workers and civil servants to places with high levels of infection during this period. It also asks all quarantined people to use a government-issued cell phone for the purpose of monitoring and tracing. These measures cause controversies, but work for disease control.

The last point is that Taiwan has a very good healthcare system, especially compared with the U.S. Taiwan’s health insurance system is affordable for the general public, which means everyone can get a medical examination or hospital treatment when necessary. It is also a scientific one: The health insurance system collects personal data and medical records, so hospitals and doctors can make good judgments about every patient’s condition. The quality of the national health system is quite important in the healing of patients and the containment of coronavirus.                 ...read more

 

From: https://www.berggruen.org/the-worldpost/articles/former-taiwan-premier-offers-lessons-on-how-the-u-s-should-deal-with-covid-19/

Effective March 24 12 AM, Taiwan will ban all transit flights. The temporary measure will last for two weeks.
(Photo from: The Storm Media)

March 16: As the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic intensifies, Taiwan has decided to ban teachers and students from high school and below from traveling abroad until the end of this semester, July 14. Those with special needs may apply separately. The Ministry of Education has issued administrative guidance regulating uniform national epidemic prevention practices while universities exercise their autonomy. Various universities have announced suspending a number of courses, and the government is currently evaluating whether to extend the travel ban to universities as well.

March 18: Taiwan and the United States issued a joint statement on epidemic prevention partnership, including strengthening cooperation mechanisms on vaccine and drug research and development. The statement was signed in the name of “Taiwan and the United States.”

March 19: There were two confirmed cases in the same class in a high school located in northern Taiwan. Classes were suspended for the school’s 1,650 students and 154 faculty members for eight days until March 27. This is the first case in Taiwan of an entire school suspending classes.

March 20: Virus fears have caused disaster to global markets. More than NT$10 trillion (about US$330 billion) in market capitalization evaporated since Chinese New Year. Taiwan has issued three arrows to stabilize the market: The Central Bank announced an interest rate cut by one basis-point (0.25 percent); the Financial Supervisory Commission banned short-selling, and NT$500 billion (about US$16.5 billion) from the National Financial Stability Fund entered the market. The Taiwan stock index rose 552.75 points, by 6.37 percent.

March 22: The number of confirmed COVID-19 cases due to cross-border immigration continues to rise. In order to prevent transmission through air transportation, Taiwan announced a comprehensive ban on boarding in and transiting through Taiwan effective March 24 so as to reduce cross-border population movement and risks of disease transmission.