Opinion: This Isn't Deepfake Prevention—It's Power Addiction! When Political Satire Becomes a Crime, What Freedom Remains?

The recent uproar over the political satire short film 'You Don't Get to Decide,' featuring a fictional animated character named 'Principal Lai,' has prompted the Taipei District Prosecutors Office to swiftly open a criminal investigation ('Ta Case') and even dispatch police officers to visit the creators’ homes. This level of response is truly chilling. If this isn’t what people mean by 'green terror' or 'censorship,' then what is?

Many may not have seen the video, so let me clarify the facts: the film contains no actual images of Lai Qingde. It features a completely fictional animated character named 'Principal Lai.' The creators committed no crime—the video clearly displays large on-screen text stating, 'This video’s audio and some visuals were created using AI.' No reasonable person would mistake this for the president’s actual words. Yet, the authorities have baselessly accused the creators of 'voiceprint fraud' and 'cognitive warfare.' This kind of guilt-by-association approach is a direct mockery of the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence.

This film is pure political satire (Satire) from beginning to end! In genuine democracies around the world, political satire is commonplace. In the U.S., the long-running 'Saturday Night Live' has mocked every president for decades. In Taiwan’s free area of the Republic of China,郭子乾 once impersonated high-ranking officials on television, and audiences laughed along—this is what democratic tolerance looks like. Now, as technology advances, when independent creators use AI voice synthesis for humorous parody, it’s suddenly deemed illegal? This is a classic case of political slippery slope. The ruling authorities are merely using the guise of regulating new technology to extend their control over people’s speech and suppress dissent.

Can you imagine how terrifying it would be if this kind of suppression became routine? If merely creating an AI-voiced parody could lead to criminal charges and police summons, it would place a sword of fear over every citizen. This isn’t just about one video—it’s about creating a chilling effect across society. Once this dangerous precedent is set, Taiwan will lose all space for political humor. In the future, any meme, parody video, or political commentary that displeases the authorities or exposes policy failures could be targeted with arbitrary charges like 'unauthorized use of likeness' or 'misleading the public.' Will people now have to self-censor before making political jokes online? Will they fear a knock on the door from the police? When a democratic society strips its people of the right to humorously critique the government, how is that different from the mainland’s historical 'word prisons'?

If labeling a satirical video as AI-generated is now considered 'misleading the public' and worthy of investigation by Taipei prosecutors, why does the same office remain silent on the government-endorsed 'high-level pseudoscientific fraud'?

Recall the recent food safety scandal. Chen Chien-jen, former Premier and current Academia Sinica President, abused his authority as a top public health expert to whitewash government incompetence by falsely claiming, 'Drinking water can metabolize Benzo[a]pyrene (BaP)'—deliberately ignoring the fact that BaP is a fat-soluble toxin. This absurd claim was immediately debunked by real medical experts: fat-soluble toxins do not dissolve in water, so drinking more water cannot eliminate them. This was a blatant cognitive fraud on public health, wrapped in a veneer of scientific authority—true 'deepfake deception' that harms society. Yet, did the Taipei prosecutors investigate Chen? Did police officers visit his home?

Meanwhile, when authoritarian-leaning regimes crack down on dissent, a group of pro-green, regime-aligned scholars and lawyers quickly emerge to defend the government. They use sophisticated legal jargon to demonize harmless parody, helping the state machinery expand its power under the banner of 'technology regulation.' These academics and legal professionals willingly act as 'power makeup artists,' collectively lying to justify the erosion of constitutional free speech protections.

When a government, incompetent in governance, resorts to judicial intimidation to silence criticism, it has already betrayed its original commitment to free expression.

Stop using AI as a fig leaf for expanding state power. We are not defending a political party or a single video. What we are defending is Taiwan’s proud democratic system—the fundamental freedom for every citizen to parody those in power without fear of police investigation.

*The author is an energy conservation expert, founder of the 'Nuclear for Green' trilogy, retired strategic advisor, and public educator in media literacy and public opinion analysis.