This November, the Chinese government has scaled up its acts of transnational repression against Taiwan by issuing warrants for Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmaker Puma Shen and cash bounties for two online influencers for engaging in ‘separatism’. This is the first time China has initiated such a judicial action against a sitting Taiwanese lawmaker. Following the initial charge of secession, China followed up with a threat to refer Puma Shen for an INTERPOL Red Notice, claiming it would compel global law enforcement to arrest him. ARTICLE 19 condemns China’s latest assault on free expression and cautions law enforcement around the world to disregard Beijing’s efforts to compel participation in transnational repression.
Michael Caster, Head of ARTICLE 19’s Global China Programme, said:
‘China’s persecution of Puma Shen is an abject act of transnational repression designed with one objective in mind: to intimidate an elected Taiwanese parliamentarian and punish the Taiwanese people for having the audacity to speak in ways contrary to Beijing’s authoritarian narrative. This is information suppression at its basest: the criminalisation of speech acts and international persecution of those who fail to self-censor.’
On 28 October 2025, Chinese Party-state Xinhua News Agency reported that the Chongqing Municipal Public Security Bureau had opened an investigation into Puma Shen for secessionist ‘Taiwan independence’ activities, including for his role in co-founding Kuma Academy. The announcement explained Shen is being investigated under relevant provisions in China’s Criminal Law and recent opinions on inciting secession, among others, which allow for trial in absentia for a range of vague and overbroad acts relating to Taiwan.
In response, Taiwan’s Government responded that ‘the Chinese Communist Party [CCP] has crossed the line by using its internal laws to build a criminal case against one of our legislators.’
Puma Shen is an elected Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) parliamentarian, taking office in February 2024. Previously, he was a co-founder of Kuma Academy, a Taiwanese civil defense organisation focused on whole-of-society resilience in the face of PRC interference. He is also a co-founder and former Chairman of Taiwan-based Doublethink Lab, which researches foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) perpetrated by the PRC and China’s broader global malign influence. Doublethink Lab publishes the China Index, which describes itself as ‘devoted to studying the malign influence of digital authoritarianism’.
On 9 November 2025, China Central Television (CCTV) ran a seven-minute feature reiterating the charges against Shen, platforming a Renmin University law professor who claimed China could follow the charge with an INTERPOL Red Notice, effectively threatening arrest if he traveled internationally. China has a history of exploiting Red Notices for transnational repression, as documented by Spain-based Safeguard Defenders.
Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded to the CCTV broadcast, calling it a ‘typical example of China’s transnational repression and a deplorable violation of human rights. Such assertions demonstrate China’s contempt for international law and blatant efforts to challenge established norms and undermine the global order.’
On 12 November, despite the threat of international arrest, Shen addressed the German parliament Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid in Berlin at a session on Disinformation by Autocratic States Aiming to Undermine Democracy and Threaten Human Rights. Addressing the escalating pressure from China, Shen posted a video saying, ‘For a very long time, China has been deploying coercive actions to try to silence Taiwanese… I am here today to safeguard not only Taiwan’s democracy but also global democracy and freedom.’
While Shen has previously been criticised by the Chinese government, such as being sanctioned by China in October 2024 as a ‘Taiwan independence’ die-hard, the recent charges and escalated threat of INTERPOL involvement, on top of changes in legal opinions on the PRC anti-secession law that claim greater extraterritoriality, the most recent charge is indicative of escalating transnational repression and information suppression from China, and targeting Taiwan.
Targeting Taiwan
In ARTICLE 19’s June 2025 report Going Global: China’s transnational repression of protesters worldwide, we outlined a number of cases of China’s transnational repression in Taiwan targeting protesters through coordinated United Front influence tactics, physical assault, and cyber-attacks, among others.
This is part of China’s broader campaign of information manipulation targeting Taiwan and seeking to undermine freedom of expression of Taiwanese people, well documented by Taiwan-based Doublethink Lab, cofounded by Puma Shen.
One example of China’s expansion of its global campaign of information manipulation and transnational repression against Taiwan is the recent sentencing of Taiwan-based book publisher Li Yanhe, known by his pen name Fucha. Following a secret trial, in March 2025 a court in Shanghai sentenced Fucha to three years in prison on charges of ‘inciting secession’. ARTICLE 19 condemned the sentencing as a politically motivated action intended to intimidate Taiwan’s cultural and academic communities and create a chilling effect that suppresses freedom of expression and the right to publish in Taiwan and the wider Chinese speaking world.
Expanding extraterritoriality
Last year, ARTICLE 19 raised alarm over new guidelines China imposed under the PRC Anti-Secession Law that allow Chinese courts to conduct trials in absentia for a range of vaguely defined activities supporting ‘Taiwan independence’, which can carry a sentence of life imprisonment. The guidelines also include a maximum potential death penalty.
Expansive claims of extraterritoriality are not only a tactic of transnational repression but also part of China’s broader trend of international norms-setting. For example, in 2019 the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party committed to ‘accelerate the extraterritorial application of Chinese laws’.
‘Unsatisfied with restricting the freedom of expression of its own citizens, China has once again sought to extend its authoritarian norms beyond its borders,’ said Caster. ‘The international community should unequivocally denounce China’s escalating threats to freedom of expression toward Taiwan.’