I first met Wang Ping-yun (汪平雲, Vincent Wang) in 2002, while preparing the English translation of the Executive Yuan's White Paper on Human Rights. Our friendship blossomed as we worked together on the "human rights act" (人權法) drafting process. His was the clearest voice in a grueling set of meetings of the drafting subcommittee set up under the Executive Yuan Human Rights Promotion Committee, and he was the most important counterpart for the team of international experts we brought in from the International Commission of Jurists.
From these experiences, I learned how dedicated he was to the true calling of the law -- that it should be an effective shield to protect the people against justice. He never thought of it as merely a mechanism for resolving disputes, much less as a political tool. In that sense, it is unfortunate that he was sometimes described as a "green camp lawyer." As far as I could see, everything he did was for the good of the whole country, especially for the institutions of the law itself, and not for a particular party or politician.
He carried out his mission with the full power of his intellect and tireless effort -- he was perpetually overworked, constantly busy with a bewildering array of projects, each of major national significance. One of the most amazing things about him was that, despite this crushing workload, he was always very considerate, never complaining or taking out his frustrations (and many there were, since the pace of the major reforms he was working on was never fast enough) on the people around him.
I last saw Ping-yun a couple of weeks before he passed away, when we had lunch together. The original purpose of the meeting was that he wanted to tell me about the latest developments with the human rights act (to be transformed into the human rights section of the new constitution), and to share the news about two new pieces of legislation: the implementing act for the International Bill of Rights (國際人權法典) -- the two Covenants still awaiting ratification in the legislature -- as well as the draft refugee law (難民法). He said he hoped very much that, among the various human rights "infrastructure projects" that remain unfinished, at least these two laws could be passed this year.
Luckily for me, he had some time that day, and we ended up having a wide-ranging discussion on a range of issues. We got into a debate about the constitutional interpretation for the "state affairs fund" case. Of course I lost the argument on legal grounds -- being up against one of the brightest legal minds in the country -- but I saw again how he was acting in defense of the Constitution itself, that he felt compelled to do so.
I think the most appropriate way to commemorate Ping-yun is to redouble our efforts to complete his work to achieve some of the major reforms he was planning. In particular, he would be pleased if we could get the ratification of the international bill of rights and its implementation act, as well as the refugee law, enacted this year. Of course, he wouldn't have been satisfied with that alone; he would always have kept striving towards the ideal state of the rule of law. We can honor his memory best by doing the same.
Bo Tedards is a political commentator based in Taipei.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS