Last Updated: November 5, 2025 | Author: Attorney Li Yusheng (Lead Attorney at Fidelity Law Firm / Guest Legal Commentator for Political Talk Shows) Foreword: That summons almost ruined his 20-year public service career. "Attorney, I really didn't take any money. I just wanted to finish the project quickly..." This was the first thing Section Chief Zhang (pseudonym) said to us, trembling, when he first came to Fidelity Law Firm. Section Chief Zhang is a senior civil servant who has served in the public works sector for over 20 years. Worried that the project would be delayed due to the typhoon season and cause flooding, he verbally agreed to the contractor changing the construction methods without completing the design change procedure. Although the project was completed on schedule, the contractor saved some costs. Section Chief Zhang was subsequently summoned by the investigative authorities for allegedly violating Article 6 of the Anti-Corruption Act, "profiteering." This is a classic tragedy: acting with public interest in mind, yet inadvertently stepping into the net of the law…

Last Updated: November 1, 2025 | Author: Attorney Li Yusheng (Focusing Attorney at Fidelity Law / Guest Legal Commentator for Political Talk Shows) Foreword: The Dilemma of Procurement Personnel: Doing Well is Duty, Making Mistakes is "Profiteering"? In the civil service, procurement positions are often considered "high-risk, dead-end jobs." Procurement personnel not only need to be familiar with the complex Government Procurement Act, but also have to deal with pressure from suppliers and demands from superiors. Most frighteningly, a careless procedural flaw may not just result in administrative penalties, but directly escalate to "profiteering" under the Anti-Corruption Act. Many civil servants interviewed by prosecutors often cry foul: "I didn't take a single penny from the supplier; I was just rushing to meet deadlines!" However, for related legal services, if the case involves the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), the Investigation Bureau, prosecutors' investigations, and the risks of civil servant corruption, profiteering, bribery, or accepting bribes, it is recommended to simultaneously assess both criminal investigation strategies and administrative job risks. You can also refer to our firm's…

Anti-Corruption Act | Profiteering Offense | Defense Against Corruption Cases Involving Civil Servants Last Updated: October 31, 2025 | Author: Attorney Li Yusheng (Focusing Attorney at Fidelity Law / Guest Legal Commentator for Political Talk Shows) When civil servants receive a summons from the Anti-Corruption Agency, the Investigation Bureau, or prosecutors, their biggest fear isn't being questioned, but rather saying the wrong thing before even understanding the case. Many civil servants, who haven't accepted bribes or kickbacks, but were simply acting in accordance with administrative procedures and for the convenience of the public, are suddenly suspected of profiteering offenses under the Anti-Corruption Act. The difference between profiteering offenses and administrative negligence often lies only in whether one "knowingly violated the law" and "whether one or a third party obtained an illegal benefit." If you or your relatives have received a summons and been notified to appear before the Anti-Corruption Agency or the Investigation Bureau, it is recommended that you calmly preserve your information and not rush to explain yourself. Corruption cases carry heavy penalties and are investigated quickly; the sooner you have a lawyer review official documents, signatures, LINE conversations, meeting minutes, and…