Taiwan’s First Female President’s PhD Controversy: Uncovering the Mystery Behind Tsai Ing-wen’s Missing Dissertation

In 2016, Tsai Ing-wen from the DPP beat her rival Eric Chu of the KMT 6,894,744 votes to 3,813,365 for the presidency of Taiwan. Tsai was the first woman elected president in Taiwan. Tsai’s party also won an absolute majority in the legislature.

The Sunflower Student Movement and a dispute between former president Ma Ying-jeou and former legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng catalyzed Tsai’s ascension in the 2016 Presidential Election. Tsai won by a landslide that year. Nobody thought she would lose.

However, the Kuomintang still had cards up its sleeve. In order to stifle the rise of the DPP, in 2015, the KMT set their sights on Tsai Ing-wen’s PhD dissertation.

Tsai’s dissertation first came under scrutiny in a 2015 article published in the SingTao Daily titled “Tsai Ing-wen’s Dissertation Not Found.” The original article has since been removed from the SingTao Daily’s website. However, the original text is available on Taiwanese online discussion forums like PTT and Dcard. From these archived versions of the article we find that…

A Taiwanese man, surnamed Kao, with research experience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology claimed on Facebook that Tsai Ing-wen’s doctoral dissertation couldn’t be found using various methods. Kao wrote on Facebook that he didn’t think there would be a problem with Tsai’s PhD from the London School of Economics, because she was listed as an alumni by the school. Kao points out that the London School of Economics lists Tsai Ing-wen and former premier Yu Kuo-hwa as former students from Taiwan. Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) from China is also listed on LSE records. Those same records say that Tsai is the only one to have graduated with a degree.

However, the article went onto say that when looking for Tsai Ing-wen’s dissertation at the London School of Economics’ Library or London University’s Senate House Library, a search for “Tsai Ing-wen,” “Tsai,” or “Unfair Trade Practices and Safeguard Actions” bore no results. Other relevant keywords were also unable to unearth Tsai’s dissertation. Searches at the British Library were also fruitless.

What’s even more interesting is that the doctoral thesis suddenly appeared on the electronic library catalog after June 28, 2019. However, this version of the dissertation, which is supposedly taken from Tsai Ing-wen’s personal copy, does not share characteristics with similar publications from the same time period. The color of the cover and the printing techniques are inconsistent with law dissertations published in the 1980’s. Furthermore, National Chengchi University professor Yen Chen-shen identified 444 misspelled words in this publication.

On June 10, 2019 Cao Changqing (曹長青), a columnist and political exile of China residing in the United States once again calls the dissertation’s legitimacy into question prompting another slew of heated discussion.

Three months ago, I asked my colleagues at the University of Wisconsin Law School and my friends in the United Kingdom to search in various databases to see if they could find any sort of text from the dissertation. If they could, then great. But, we can’t simply dismiss a news article just because of the impact it might have on someone in an election — it doesn’t matter who it benefits.

This letter reply from LSE brought the dissertation discussion back to the 2015 Singtao Daily news article. Chiefly, it brought the focus back to the claims of Mr. Kao. LSE said it “never received” a copy of Tsai Ing-wen’s thesis.

Tsai’s team immediately took to the internet to refute these claims. First, long-time DPP supporter and former head of the North America Taiwanese Professors’ Association Li Chung-chih (李中志) , as well as DPP legislator Wang Ding-yu (王定宇), both published pictures of Tsai Ing-wen’s diploma on Facebook. They said that the questions that surround Tsai’s dissertation are merely a smear campaign.

In the face of the mounting accusations, Tsai refused to hold any sort of press conference to offer an explanation. Instead, at a gathering of young voters, Tsai pulled out what she said was a diploma from LSE re-issued to her in 2015. The diploma sat in a plastic folder and was shown only for a few minutes. However, this incident unintentionally incited another wave of skepticism. The diploma was different from other re-issued degrees. The Office of the President wouldn’t dare bring this document out again.

The circumstances surrounding this mysterious dissertation continue to develop even today. On June 28, 2019, Tsai Ing-wen left the people of Taiwan waiting for an answer. During this time, an alleged original copy of the dissertation, pulled from Tsai’s personal collection, was supposedly sent to the LSE Women’s Library. LSE’s electronic library updated its index to include this copy of the thesis. However, before the full text of the dissertation was cataloged electronically, LSE records showed, unbelievably, that this thesis had two authors.

The case of Tsai Ing-wen’s doctoral dissertation sure is an amazing one. I, myself, studied for three-and-a-half years in the US to get my PhD.

There is indeed a book called Unfair Trade Practices and Safeguard Actions. Well, there it is, but get this, this dissertation has two authors. One is Tsai Ing-wen, and the other is Michael Elliot. Michael John is in parenthesis behind Michael Elliot. It could be that this person has two names, I’m not so sure myself.

But then you get to the bottom and you’ll see “Thesis Ph D, 2019.” This means that this book was published in 2019. But, normally, if a publication is, for whatever reason, lost and re-entered into a system, usually, the publication wouldn’t indicate the date it was re-entered into such a system.

So this thesis was published in 2019. How does a person graduate in 1984 and get their dissertation published 35 years later? We’re talking about the publishing date, too. We’re not even talking about release. If a dissertation had once been released, then the date printed should default to when the dissertation was first made available.

The most amazing part still is this author section. The book says it’s authored by Tsai Ing-wen and Michael Elliot (Michael John), just as we saw before. Below that we see “The University of London.”

To anyone who has ever attempted to get a PhD, this is just plain laughable. I’ve never seen or heard of a PhD dissertation having two authors.

President Tsai is sending her dissertation out to the school. We see in that letter that she’s sending it by fax. I mean, who uses a fax machine anymore? Isn’t that tiring? Anyway, apparently, the school has already received the dissertation. But, the funny thing is if you look at the database entry, you’ll notice that this dissertation has two authors. We’ve mentioned that on this show before. How does that even work? How can a dissertation be written by two people? This should go into the Guiness Book of World Records!

Two authors wouldn’t be the only irregularity found throughout this “Thesis-gate” scandal. There are still many more things to look into. If Tsai’s dissertation was omitted by accident, then that begs the question, why does there have to be such an elaborate cover-up in 2019?

A missing dissertation isn’t a crime. Falsifying records, on the other hand, is. Not to mention, the inconsistencies uncovered in Taiwan took place in the United Kingdom, which means that there is someone over there helping to cover these 36-year-old tracks.

A reporter from Taiwan’s state-run Central News Agency interviewed a woman claiming to be co-director of LSE’s Taiwan Research Programme. Her name? Ms. Shih Feng-Long (施芳瓏). The interview was the first in a series of systematic moves to defend the legitimacy of Tsai’s dissertation. The media often refers to Ms. Shih as a “representative of LSE.” Shih helped Tsai garner the Taiwanese public’s trust.

LSE’s school library not having a copy of Tsai Ing-wen’s dissertation and Tsai’s Ph.D are two different things, aren’t they? Do all university libraries around the world carry every thesis that their students have ever written? LSE is not the first school of its kind, and I don’t think it’s the only school to do so either. If a university doesn’t carry a copy of a student’s dissertation, does that then mean that students’ degree is not legitimate. What kind of logic is that?

When Tsai Ing-wen was elected president, LSE announced that: “Former LSE student Dr Tsai Ing-wen… has become president-elect of Taiwan…who gained a PhD Law from LSE in 1984.” LSE must have had to thoroughly review Tsai’s student records before making such an announcement. Why would an announcement on LSE’s website not be trustworthy?

Why do people do such things for a presidential primary? It not only damages the reputation of a prestigious university, it also damages the livelihood of people. Ruth Orson is very hurt. She never thought that her private letter would be used to publicly besmirch a country’s president, much less without her permission. Has this presidential primary been “democratic”? Is this a good reflection of what a “democratic” society should be?

I am sure the truth will be accepted more and more over time. I have learned a lot from the netizens through this experience. You don’t doubt Tsai’s PhD, but you still want to see her dissertation, is that right? LSE and Tsai have no desire to skirt this issue.

But, all of this happened 35 years ago. Back then, there were only hard copies of dissertations. During that time, only London University could hand out doctorates to students. Tsai’s dissertation was handed over to London University for evaluation. But, after 35 years, the librarian who would have been in charge of filing Tsai’s dissertation is long gone. Furthermore, London University underwent restructuring in the past decade, also reshuffling the school’s library system. Another consideration is legality. There are laws that protect the private information and identity of certain individuals. For example, Tsai’s advisor. To get that information would require their consent.

Two days ago, when President Tsai registered for an account on the online forum Dcard, she was required to provide her LSE diploma to verify who she was, as per their policy. It was the first time that her doctorate degree was shown in public. Even then, people began questioning the legitimacy of her diploma after seeing it. There was a little merit to that claim, I’ll admit. London University’s administrative standards are not quite as stringent or detailed as those found at universities in Taiwan. In Taiwan, a re-issued diploma would have to be labeled as such. However, the diploma that was shown that day was not the original one that Tsai received in 1984.

My European colleagues at LSE don’t know Tsai Ing-wen. They don’t know William Lai. Now, they even think Cao Changqing is from Taiwan. As a Taiwanese, myself, I can only apologize to them. I’ve sent them flowers, chocolates, and even wine. What other gifts of apology would you like me to send them on Taiwan’s behalf?

The dissertation has already been released. LSE never had the dissertation to begin with, because it didn’t need to keep it. Back then, LSE didn’t grant the doctorate to Tsai, London University did. If London University lost the dissertation, then it’s been lost. The one LSE has in its possession was sent over by President Tsai. It is open and available to the public. Non-LSE students or faculty need only apply and abide by the library’s rules to view the dissertation. Due to copyright law, old dissertations such as that one cannot be copied or reproduced without the author’s consent. That’s why LSE has restrictions on photographing the dissertation without the writer’s consent. Even now, as President Tsai’s dissertation is made available to the public, there are still people in Taiwan who criticize the school, saying that these measures are tantamount to surveillance. So long as the school doesn’t give into everything these people want, the rhetoric surrounding the dissertation will bounce between “too scared to release” or “falsified.”

- Ms. Shih Feng-Long

Do these “official” statements and explanations hold any water? Since they were made, personal views on “Thesis-gate” became increasingly polarized.

Former head of the North America Taiwanese Professors’ Association, and current associate professor at UNC Charlotte’s Belk College of Business, Dr. Hwan Lin (林環牆), made a trip to LSE on August 6, 2019. While there, he read the 364-paged printed dissertation. Three weeks later, on August 27, 2019, he completed a 50-page independent report and published it in an American Chinese-language media outlet Taiwanus.net.

Two days later, on August 29, 2019, Tsai Ing-wen’s former university instructor, Ho De-fen held a press conference, and set her sights on President Tsai.

She (Tsai Ing-wen) never revealed who her doctoral advisor was. She said that that man (Michael Elliot) was a journalist that only held a bachelor’s degree. Would LSE really let someone like that be a doctoral advisor? Would LSE take that kind of risk? This person (Michael Elliot) has never come out and said anything. Everyone has been wondering where he’s been since his name came to light. He passed away two years ago. You can’t find him.

Not even fourth or fifth-rate schools would allow something like this. A bachelor-holder advising a doctoral candidate is impossible.

The most important thing is — and I’m sure professor Chen can vouch for me here — is that the first page of a dissertation will always have the signatures of professors who sat on the evaluation committee. This is something that is always included in a thesis. National Taiwan University has always done this. There are no signatures on this dissertation. But, do you remember, in Tsai Ing-wen’s autobiography, she said her thesis was so good that the committee deliberated for two hours and offered to grant her two doctorates, but they settled on one-and-a-half? This is something that is unheard of in the academic circle — giving someone one-and-a-half doctorates. Who knew Tsai had it in her to make such extraordinary claims? We must hold our politicians accountable. The people have every right to raise their doubts and concerns, and politicians have an obligation to respond to those suspicions. Tsai has never responded to these claims against her, we 99% know why in our hearts.

There’s also one other unthinkable matter we have to divulge here today. When Professor Lin arrived at LSE, he had to view the dissertation under supervision. He wasn’t allowed to sit anywhere further away from the supervisor, and they constantly watched him. He wasn’t allowed to copy text, take pictures, or make photocopies…Nothing! He could only flip through the pages one-by-one. I am a specialist in copyright law. The purpose of copyright law is to allow the spread of information. It allows your work to be viewed by others so that they may learn from it. Copyrights allow for quotes and citations within reason. That is how civilization develops and expands. However, LSE tells us that we cannot do anything with the dissertation. We can’t copy, can’t cite, can’t quote, nothing! The policy of this library flies directly in the face of copyright law! The UK is the forefather of copyright law. Would you believe that they would have this kind of policy? Can you believe the LSE library has these kinds of rules? It is unreasonable.

This dissertation must be immensely valuable, like the Magna Carta. There’s only one copy, and in order to see it, we must board a flight to London. Even then, once we’re there, we will be watched by a librarian as we read through it. Only under these conditions are we allowed to read this book. Can you believe that?

Are Taiwanese people that stupid? Are we that easily tricked? Why not make more copies, and make it available for sale. Let everyone have a copy, and allow us to learn from its glorious pages! Which other person’s dissertation can get such preferential treatment?

I already said what I had to say about Tsai’s response. Even the education ministry has helped me say my piece. There are records of meetings I’ve had when discussing my promotions. There’s nothing off there. I have a thesis!

Are education officials so careless that they can’t even falsify a thesis correctly, and they have to give us this mess? Or, are they leaving breadcrumbs for us so that we can find the truth and uphold justice? Regardless, I think that the education ministry and it’s high ranking officials should be audited. They are complicit in lying to the people. Professor Lee Chung-chih and legislator Wang Ding-yu have taken to Facebook to praise the dissertation and defend the legitimacy of Tsai’s degree. I think they also have to face legal ramifications. This is no minor infringement. Anywhere else in the world, this case would draw massive controversy. Like I just said, thieves and liars get punished everywhere else, so how can we let people get away with false education here?