Former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je is suspected of committing bribery, favoring interests, misappropriation of public funds, and breach of trust in the “Jinghua City Case” and the “Political Donations Case.” He was sentenced by the district court in the first instance to 17 years in prison and deprived of civil rights for six years. According to TPP party rules, the maximum punishment can be “expulsion” (removal from party membership).
However, the TPP secretly amended its rules: Article 17 of its “Disciplinary Review and Adjudication Guidelines” now includes the addition, “but those determined by the Central Review Committee to have significant special circumstances are not subject to this limit.” Since this wording was added only recently, the public suspects it may have been intended as a loophole for Ko Wen-je.
According to a March 26 report by Liberty Times, Article 17 of the TPP “Disciplinary Review and Adjudication Guidelines” stipulates that if party members holding public office violate relevant matters, they shall be expelled or suspended depending on the severity. The first clause specifies crimes under the Criminal Code such as misappropriation, fraud, or breach of trust; the second clause includes violations of the “Political Donations Act” and the “Anti-Corruption Act.”
Comparing the district court ruling with TPP internal regulations, Ko Wen-je’s alleged crimes of corruption, misappropriation, and breach of trust clearly violate multiple core provisions of the guidelines. Whether the TPP Central Committee will subsequently expel Ko Wen-je according to the rules has become a focus of public attention.
However, the media reported on the 27th that when reviewing the TPP “Disciplinary Review and Adjudication Guidelines,” they found that Article 17 originally stated, “If party members holding public office violate relevant matters, they shall be expelled or suspended depending on the severity,” but two additional sentences have now been added: “but those determined by the Central Review Committee to have significant special circumstances are not subject to this limit.”
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
Regarding questions from the media about whether Ko Wen-je will voluntarily leave the party or face disciplinary action following his 17-year sentence in the first instance, Huang Kuo-chang stated that the TPP frames Ko Wen-je’s case as political persecution by the DPP. “Of course, there will be no issue of leaving the party, nor any party disciplinary issue.”
In contrast, Hsinchu Mayor Kao Hung-an was sentenced in 2024 in the first instance under the “Anti-Corruption Act” to 7 years and 4 months in prison and deprived of civil rights for four years. Kao announced her resignation from the TPP the same day. In the second instance, the High Court revised the corruption charge to not guilty in December last year and sentenced her to six months under the Criminal Code for falsifying public records, with a fine of NT$180,000. Kao has since legally resumed her position as mayor and remains unaffiliated with any party.
According to Formosa TV News, Li Wei-hua, chairman of the TPP Central Review Committee, confirmed that the committee decided this morning to revise the guideline to read: “If party members holding public office violate the following matters, they shall be expelled or suspended depending on the severity. ‘But those determined by the Central Review Committee to have significant special circumstances are not subject to this limit.’”
Furthermore, the latest version of the TPP “Disciplinary Review and Adjudication Guidelines” explicitly notes that it was amended by the Central Review Committee on March 27, 2026.
It is reported that a Central Review Committee member told the media that this amendment was directly ordered by TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang, who will also take responsibility for it.
Regarding the TPP quietly amending party rules for Ko Wen-je, former TPP Central Committee member Chang Yi-shan posted on Facebook, calling the move “obviously trying to cover something up.” He said that by secretly modifying the “Disciplinary Review and Adjudication Guidelines” to add the phrase “those with significant special circumstances are not subject to this limit,” the party raises questions: “Was the amendment proposed with the consent of the Central Committee and approved by the Party Congress?”
Chang Yi-shan also criticized that if not, any party member reporting it could constitute “forgery of official documents,” and questioned: “Who ordered the amendment? Was it party chairman Huang Kuo-chang? Who instructed whom to be responsible?”
By Li Jingyao
