Here is a summary of the claims made in the video:

Regarding Concerns of High-Level Officials from the Presidential Office and Executive Yuan Lobbying Grand Justices

• Alleged Incident: Media reports indicate that high-level officials from the Presidential Office and Executive Yuan "communicated" through high-ranking party and government officials with close ties to Grand Justice Tsai Tsung-Jen (蔡宗珍), intervening in the operations of the Constitutional Court.
• Legislative Background: The legislative body already passed the "crime of illegal lobbying" bill after its third reading in May 2025, which incorporates acts of using influence to lobby prosecutors and judges (including Grand Justices) into the scope of criminal penalties.
• Questions Directed at the Ministry of Justice:
  • The video's publisher has legally reported this incident, and the Taipei District Prosecutors Office has opened an investigation.
  • Questions the Ministry of Justice's attitude towards investigating this specific case, concerned that the Taipei District Prosecutors Office will "let it go uninvestigated."
  • Criticizes the Deputy Minister of Justice's claim of not intervening in specific cases, believing that the Ministry's past stance on "certain specific cases" has been inconsistent, making their current statement unconvincing.
• Questions Directed at the Ministry of the Interior:
  • The Presidential Office spokesperson denied the media report, stating it was "unverified."
  • Questions whether the Ministry of the Interior, as the competent authority for the Social Order Maintenance Act, will punish media outlets that disseminate "fake news."
  • During questioning, the Deputy Minister of the Interior initially stated that the Social Order Maintenance Act has provisions for punishing media for disseminating fake news, but then also said they "respect media reports and will not comment/handle them."
  • The Deputy Minister of the Interior further stated that the Social Order Maintenance Act does not exclude media from its regulations but rather respects the media's "fourth estate autonomy," and pushed the responsibility for handling illegal media reports to the National Communications Commission's (NCC) "media self-regulation."
  • Finally, the Deputy Minister of the Interior stated that the Presidential Office spokesperson merely saying "unverified" does not equate to the media report being "fake news." The video's publisher used this to sarcastically suggest that the Ministry of Justice should thoroughly investigate this case.

Regarding Prosecutors' Responsibility for Leaking Secrets to Fraud Rings

• Alleged Incident: Prosecutor Wu Ya-Chih (吳亞芝) of the Taoyuan District Prosecutors Office leaked confidential information from an ongoing investigation to her boyfriend, who served as a lawyer for a fraud ring.
• Dissatisfaction with the Ministry of Justice's Stance:
  • The Taoyuan District Prosecutors Office initially claimed that the leak did not affect the investigation because the investigation had concluded. Although an investigation was later opened due to questioning, it was subsequently closed on their own accord.
  • Questions the previous stance of Minister of Justice Cheng Ming-Chien (鄭銘謙) who stated he "respected the Taoyuan District Prosecutors Office's decision to close the case," viewing this as "officials protecting each other."
  • Points out that both the Prosecutor Evaluation Committee (PEC) and the Disciplinary Court have determined that this act constituted "leaking confidential matters from an ongoing investigation."
• Ministry of Justice's Latest Response and Requirements:
  • The Deputy Minister of Justice stated that the Ministry of Justice has sent a formal letter to the Taoyuan District Prosecutors Office, requiring it to impose legal sanctions and independently decide whether to reopen the investigation.
  • Regarding the Disciplinary Court's ruling to only impose a "fine" on the said prosecutor, the Deputy Minister of Justice stated that they "will appeal according to law."
• Video Publisher's Appeal: Seriously pursue legal responsibility; the prosecutor who leaked secrets should not receive only a minor punishment and continue to serve, otherwise, the "anti-fraud" efforts will lose their meaning.