Chen Chih-han Faces Court Again Over ''Beheading President'' Remarks; Prosecutor Labels Speech Unconstitutional
Influencer Chen Chih-han appeared in court for remarks about ''beheading the president'' during a live stream. Prosecutors argued his high-traffic platform caused public panic and violated constitutional limits on free speech. Chen pleaded not guilty, accusing the prosecution of taking his words out of context and politically targeting him.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: April 29, 2026 at 21:33
- 🔍 Collected: April 29, 2026 at 22:01 (28 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: April 30, 2026 at 01:52 (3h 51m after Collected)
(CNA, New Taipei City, 29th) Influencer ''Genghis Khan'' Chen Chih-han appeared in court again today after being indicted for shouting ''behead the president'' during a live stream. The prosecutor argued that Chen''s remarks caused public panic and constitute unconstitutional speech. Chen maintained his plea of not guilty during the hearing and criticized the prosecutor afterward for targeting him personally and subverting his understanding of the judiciary.
According to the indictment, Chen Chih-han expressed views in a YouTube stream last October such as ''let''s just have armed unification'' and ''behead Lai Ching-te''s dog head.'' He was subsequently indicted by the New Taipei District Prosecutors Office on charges including intimidating the public and endangering safety.
The New Taipei District Court held its second preparatory hearing today. The prosecutor presented a briefing stating that Chen Chih-han utilized his high social media traffic to spread threats and pro-unification content under the guise of free speech, which caused widespread panic and reached the level of unconstitutional speech.
In court, Chen still refused to plead guilty. His defense attorney argued that Chen was discussing political topics like the ''Blue-White coalition'' and removing the DPP from power, and was merely commenting on news reports regarding beheading operations by the PLA, with no intent to intimidate. Furthermore, as a private citizen, Chen has no capability to carry out such an operation, and the complaints mostly came from individuals with opposing political stances.
The defense requested the court to inquire with the National Security Bureau if security levels were raised due to Chen''s remarks, but the prosecutor deemed it unnecessary, stating that the crime of intimidation punishes the notification of harm, not a test of courage; it is sufficient if an ordinary person feels endangered.
Speaking after the hearing, Chen Chih-han stated he was engaging in a Q&A during his stream, but the prosecutor took segments out of context to accuse him of harming the Taiwanese people and supporting armed unification. ''When did I ever say such things?'' he asked. He argued that intimidation requires causing actual fear, but the prosecutor''s claim that it depends only on subjective criminal intent subverted his understanding of the law. Regarding whether to summon President Lai, Chen said that based on legal advice, the President would not attend anyway, so no further action is needed. He criticized the prosecutor for ''targeting the person,'' noting the case shifted from intimidating Lai Ching-te to a national security event involving the public and the constitution. (Editor: Lung Po-an)
According to the indictment, Chen Chih-han expressed views in a YouTube stream last October such as ''let''s just have armed unification'' and ''behead Lai Ching-te''s dog head.'' He was subsequently indicted by the New Taipei District Prosecutors Office on charges including intimidating the public and endangering safety.
The New Taipei District Court held its second preparatory hearing today. The prosecutor presented a briefing stating that Chen Chih-han utilized his high social media traffic to spread threats and pro-unification content under the guise of free speech, which caused widespread panic and reached the level of unconstitutional speech.
In court, Chen still refused to plead guilty. His defense attorney argued that Chen was discussing political topics like the ''Blue-White coalition'' and removing the DPP from power, and was merely commenting on news reports regarding beheading operations by the PLA, with no intent to intimidate. Furthermore, as a private citizen, Chen has no capability to carry out such an operation, and the complaints mostly came from individuals with opposing political stances.
The defense requested the court to inquire with the National Security Bureau if security levels were raised due to Chen''s remarks, but the prosecutor deemed it unnecessary, stating that the crime of intimidation punishes the notification of harm, not a test of courage; it is sufficient if an ordinary person feels endangered.
Speaking after the hearing, Chen Chih-han stated he was engaging in a Q&A during his stream, but the prosecutor took segments out of context to accuse him of harming the Taiwanese people and supporting armed unification. ''When did I ever say such things?'' he asked. He argued that intimidation requires causing actual fear, but the prosecutor''s claim that it depends only on subjective criminal intent subverted his understanding of the law. Regarding whether to summon President Lai, Chen said that based on legal advice, the President would not attend anyway, so no further action is needed. He criticized the prosecutor for ''targeting the person,'' noting the case shifted from intimidating Lai Ching-te to a national security event involving the public and the constitution. (Editor: Lung Po-an)