Lawmaker's office denies influence peddling in immigration and fraud allegations

The office of Kuomintang legislator Lin Ssu-ming has released an eight-point statement vehemently denying accusations of improper conduct, including allegations of intervening in immigration cases and involvement in a multi-billion dollar fraud scheme. The statement aims to clarify Lin's role and refute claims that his office engaged in "guan shuo" (influence peddling).

“

Handling complaints and petitions in accordance with the law is the duty of a people's representative; understanding the progress of cases is not lobbying or applying pressure, nor is it facilitating matters.

Lin's office argues that accepting and processing constituent complaints and inquiries about administrative procedures is a standard responsibility for elected officials. They emphasize that understanding case progress does not equate to pressuring or influencing authorities, nor does it imply involvement in the decision-making process. The statement stresses that all applications for individuals from China to enter Taiwan are subject to independent review by relevant authorities, and no legislator can dictate the outcome.

“

Any Chinese national applying to enter Taiwan must undergo independent review by the competent authorities in accordance with the law, and no people's representative can influence the decision.

Furthermore, the statement addresses specific allegations, including assisting individuals from China in obtaining entry permits and inquiring about review results. Lin's office asserts that such actions are part of providing administrative assistance to constituents and do not constitute illegal lobbying or favoritism. They maintain that there is no evidence to support claims of interference, pressure, or influencing administrative decisions, and that any illegal activities should be investigated by the judiciary.

“

Democratic and rule-of-law society should speak with evidence, not with speculation or titles to convict.

The legislator's office also criticized media reports for linking unrelated cases and creating public misunderstanding through speculation rather than concrete evidence. They reiterated their commitment to upholding the principles of lawful governance and service, welcoming judicial and social oversight. However, they stressed that accusations should be based on facts and evidence, not on sensationalized headlines or conjecture, and reserved the right to pursue legal action against defamatory reporting.

“

For any untrue insinuations, erroneous connections, or unbalanced reports that are not fully verified and are damaging to the reputation of the office and the committee, the office expresses deep regret and reserves all legal rights to protect its reputation and legitimate rights.