台灣中國關係獨一無二，無法比擬綠卡或楓葉卡

【雙魚之論】英文拷到 G / D 找中文翻譯
中國居住證與定居證有何不同 差異一次看懂
fter the 2024 election, the Kuomintang (KMT), recognizing that it was unlikely to return to power on its own anytime soon, turned to cooperation with the Taiwan People's Party (TPP) to secure control of the Legislative Yuan. As a result, beyond exhibiting political confusion and a lack of direction, the KMT has increasingly resorted to labeling its competitors without regard for the facts.
At first glance, statements by Kinmen legislator Chen Yu-jen reported in the media may seem reasonable. However, there are two major issues: First, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) explicitly cited the Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area as its legal basis, yet Chen insisted there was no legal foundation. Second, she compared the “Residence Permit for Taiwan Residents” (issued by the PRC as a prerequisite for obtaining a mainland Chinese ID) to foreign residency permits such as the U.S. Green Card or Canada’s Permanent Resident Card, arguing that the former should be deemed legitimate just like the latter. What she omitted, however, is that Taiwan and China are in a sui generis relationship—a unique legal arrangement—which therefore requires special legislation to regulate cross-strait interactions. As the legal maxim goes, generalia specialibus non derogant—a law governing a specific subject matter (lex specialis) overrides a law that governs general matters (lex generalis).
As a legacy of post–Pacific War territorial questions, Taiwan’s sovereignty remains undetermined—it could belong to a state, become independent, form a union, or follow another path. In the meantime, it operates under self-governance. This autonomous status means that Taiwan exercises jurisdiction without full sovereignty, and that it stands in a relationship of mutual non-subordination with China. To avoid sovereignty disputes between Taiwan and China, the current legal framework regulates only matters of jurisdiction. Furthermore, given China’s ongoing preparations for aggression and annexation, the PRC’s “Residence Permit for Taiwan Residents” cannot be equated with the U.S. Green Card or Canadian PR Card, nor can it be allowed to enable Taiwanese nationals to hold dual identification.
The same principle applies at the technical level of administrative management: it is essential first to distinguish clearly between the two regions and their respective populations. Doing so ensures that, whether the future holds separation or integration, any course of action can be implemented more smoothly. If these distinctions are not defined now, any future resolution of Taiwan’s status could become unenforceable in practice.
Deliberately blurring identities to facilitate future decisions—perhaps that’s exactly what Beijing has in mind.
Chen Yu-jen and her KMT colleague Weng Hsiao-Ling appear particularly concerned about civil rights—perhaps they themselves have applied for a “Residence Permit for Taiwan Residents”? If so, their qualifications as legislators would naturally be void.

2024年選後，國民黨自覺執政無望但與民眾黨合作就可以掌握立法權，於是政治表現得無方向感的混亂之外，更變得不管事實如何只管貼標籤。
報導中金門立委陳玉珍所言乍看之下合理，但一者陸委會明明有說明依據的是《兩岸人民關係條例》，但陳玉珍硬說無法律依據；二者，她又比照美國綠卡、加拿大楓葉卡等他國居留權例子，認定作為辦理中國大陸居民身分證前置作業的「台灣居民定居證」也應一體合法，她卻不提台灣與中國是特殊狀態，故設置了特別法管理台灣與中國人民來往的事務。特別法優於普通法，故優先適用。
作為太平洋戰爭後領土地位議題，台灣主權尚未確認誰屬—可能屬於某國，可能獨立或其他，無論如何現在是自治狀態。自治狀態表示台灣的管轄權不在其主權之下，或稱與中國互不隸屬。在迴避台灣與中國的主權糾紛下，法律架構下僅規範管轄事務。再加上中國對台灣有侵略與併吞的議題與實質準備，因此，「台灣居民定居證」無法比照綠卡或楓葉卡，允許雙重存在。
在行政管理的技術層次也是一樣的，必須要先區分兩地與其上的人民，對未來無論是分隔或統合處理上都很便利。若不先定義清楚，台灣地位未來有了決定，就無法執行。將身分搞混以利於未來的決定，大概就是北京的心思吧？
報導中陳玉珍似乎很在意公民權，大概自己也有申請「台灣居民定居證」吧？若是如此，立委資格就自然取消。

持大陸定居證恐失台灣身分？陳玉珍打臉：那美國綠卡呢    中時 20250424

陸配亞亞、恩綺、小薇因涉武統言論遭移民署處以強制離台後，陸委會進一步要求不得擁有對岸定居證，否則恐喪失台灣身分。針對陸委會今(24)日的最新函釋，國民黨立委陳玉珍質疑，標準必須一致，如果說有境外居住證，就不能擁有中華民國身分，那美國綠卡也不能？

陸委會今(24日)公布最新函釋，依照《兩岸人民關係條例》，台灣地區人民不得在大陸地區設籍，且此設籍包括持有中國大陸居民身分證及「定居證」。陸委會副主委梁文傑強調沒有擴張認定，表示因為拿到了對岸的定居證，就意味著拿到對岸戶籍，並能領取身分證，這是連續性的動作。

根據華視新聞台報導，陳玉珍對此質疑，政府要限制人民的權利，應該要依法有據。不知道陸委會是憑哪一條法令，來限制人民這個權利？尤其要剝奪中華民國國民住在我們國內的權利，或是公民權。像之前陸委會對軍公教要清查，他們是不是有相關的證件，但依法無據。所有政府機關都應該依法行政！陸委會是用函釋，但函釋也要有一個依據。如果說有境外居住證，就不能擁有中華民國國籍，相對地，這個標準是不是統一的？

「那就請問行政院，如果是有美國的綠卡，那也是一個居住證，那是不是也不能夠擁有中華民國的國籍？」陳玉珍打臉直言，或是我們所說加拿大楓葉卡，是PR，那種永久公民居住證，是不是中華民國的國民只要擁有中華民國台灣地區以外地方的居住證，都不能擁有中華民國身分證？這個一定要弄清楚！如果陸委會是這樣函釋，接下來也可能會有人去找外交部去函釋：擁有美國綠卡的，是不是也不能擁有中華民國的國民身分證？這個標準必須要一致！