the child’s privacy. Upon investigation and subsequent follow-up by the Control Yuan, the criteria for publication of debt clearance cases was discussed. It will now only disclose the number of minors supported by the debtor, and in the event of any dispute, any stakeholder may access the court file in person for clarification. 121. Some scams are based on fraudulent use of an individual’s personal data; it is difficult to validate the authencity of the data use, and eventually some people are cheated. As no positive result has been achieved by the counseling and inspection given by the Ministry of Economic Affairs to the online retailers concerning confidentiality of personal data, the Executive Yuan, as the superior authority overseeing the industry authorities as expressly defined in the Personal Data Protection Act, should work with the competent authority in charge of the Act (the National Development Council) to raise the awareness of information security and personal data confidentiality in entities other than government agencies, and also to rectify their misuderstanding of the Act. Upon investigation and subsequent follow-up by the Control Yuan, the Ministry of Economic Affairs inspected and identified the suppliers with poor records in maintaining information security, and made public a list of these suppliers. Meanwhile, it directed various competent authorities to set forth their own regulations to improve on personal data protection. Article 19 Freedom of Speech Freedom of Speech 122. Paragraph 1 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code provides that “A person who publicly insults another should be sentenced to short-term imprisonment or a fine of not more than three hundred dollars.” The definitive element constituting the offense of an “insult” is an undetermined legal concept, for which no specific and objective criteria is available in a court’s judgment. Therefore, it is impossible to envision any applicable criteria, and offenders are held in violation of the law at the discretion of the court. Some uncertainty exists in the penalty to be imposed under the Criminal Code. The definition of “insult” may be extremely broad. Therefore, people risk taking blame and being assessed penalties whenever expressing an opinion. Under these circumstances, freedom of speech is prevented from exercising the full range of its functions, such as supervision of the government by a citizenry, self-realization, and promotion of democracy. While the restrictions under the Article could conceivably apply to abusive expression of personal opinions or emotional outbursts to others, the said circumstances are nontheless better considered a type of freedom of speech protected under Article 11 of the Constitution. The so-called offense of “public insult” impinges on people’s personal freedom and freedom of speech. Therefore, it should be subject to a high criteria in 52