The controversy over People First Party at-large legislator Li Zhenxiu’s nationality has intensified, with public attention focused on whether she has legally completed the renunciation of her Chinese nationality. The issue has become a central concern in both politics and society. The administrative authorities have emphasized handling the matter according to law, while political parties interpret the regulations differently and engage in mutual attacks. The dispute could escalate into a legal and constitutional-level issue.
Oath-taking sparks debate; nationality becomes core controversy
After Li Zhenxiu recently took her oath of office as a legislator, questions arose about whether she still holds Chinese nationality. Li publicly presented certain flight tickets and documents in the Legislative Yuan and stated that she “only holds a Republic of China (Taiwan) passport” and is loyal to Taiwan. However, because the renunciation process has not yet been officially processed, she has not obtained formal certification. She stressed that she currently only holds a ROC passport and has completed the election and oath-taking procedures in accordance with the law.
Nonetheless, because the authorities have not yet received valid proof of renunciation of foreign nationality, Li’s nationality status is still considered unresolved. According to Taiwan’s Nationality Act and related regulations, public officials must renounce other nationalities before taking office. If the renunciation process is incomplete, the Legislative Yuan has the authority to remove the legislator from office.
Administrative authorities stress legal procedure, qualification defined by nationality law
Both the Executive Yuan and the Ministry of the Interior have stated that legislative qualifications must be determined according to the Nationality Act and related laws. Whether a foreign nationality has been renounced must be based on formal documentation. The Ministry of the Interior added that if the required proof is incomplete, subsequent actions will follow legal procedures, including potential initiation of relevant review mechanisms.
Considering national security risks, the Ministry further noted that since Li has not presented complete and legally valid proof, if she cannot provide valid renunciation documents within one year after taking office, the Legislative Yuan may lawfully remove her from office. To prevent national security concerns, official departments will not provide her office with classified or higher-level documents.
KMT, DPP, and PFP clash; legal interpretation and political maneuvering run in parallel
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
The nationality dispute has quickly escalated into a political struggle.
Legislators and groups from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) have argued that as long as Li has not formally renounced her Chinese nationality, she is unfit to serve as a legislator. Some even suggest she may be subject to obligations under Chinese law, which could pose a national security risk.
Representatives of the Kuomintang (KMT) cite constitutional and cross-strait legal definitions, arguing that the People’s Republic of China has a distinct legal meaning within Taiwan’s legal framework, and relevant regulations still require clarification.
The People First Party (PFP) and Li Zhenxiu herself counter that the nationality issue is being over-politicized. They emphasize that she was legally elected and has sworn allegiance to the Republic of China, and that the dispute should be handled through institutional and legal mechanisms, not political judgment.
Future developments under scrutiny; could escalate to constitutional-level issue
As the administrative authorities clarify the law and the Legislative Yuan’s stance and political maneuvering continue, public attention focuses on whether the case will further enter judicial or constitutional proceedings. Scholars note that the case not only concerns the qualification of an individual legislator but also touches on the application of the Nationality Act, the legal positioning of cross-strait relations, and national security boundaries, potentially becoming an important institutional precedent.
