President Chen Shui-bian (
Investigations, legal reviews and verdicts involving politicians have been questioned by both the pan-blue and pan-green camps, leading to much criticism about unfairness and political intervention in the process. As a result, the public has once again begun to call for judicial reform.
Among other things, judicial reform should be based in how judicial officials are selected. Changing the attitudes and behavior of the large number of existing judicial officials is a difficult project.
A faster and more effective road to judicial reform is to ensure that the grand justices who lead the system have a solid professional grounding. Bringing about change among other judges and prosecutors starts with this.
Eight new grand justices are about to be appointed, together with a new Judicial Yuan president and vice president. This is a rare opportunity for reform.
It is crucial that these appointments are not blocked like the Control Yuan appointments were. Nor should legislators use political motives to appoint unfit candidates who will block judicial reform.
Before legislators vote for the nominees, a few flaws in the process must be pointed out.
First, the legislature's hearings have been excessively political in nature, with pan-blue legislators asking a few supposedly pro-green-camp nominees questions about their relationships with the president and their opinions of Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (
These legislators wasted a precious opportunity to inquire about the nominees' legal education, trial experience, record of decisions and views on upcoming judicial issues.
Second, although the grand justice nominee review and the nomination of Control Yuan members differ in timing and in the nature of the positions, the two issues have merged in light of political competition and skulduggery.
The pan-blue camp will only pass the grand justice nominations in exchange for the passage of its Control Yuan nomination list, while the pan-green camp will only pass the Control Yuan list if the passage of their grand justice list is guaranteed. This has turned the review into a bargaining chip for backstage negotiations.
Due to the lack of trust between the two camps, the technical issue of whether the nominees should be voted for individually or as a group has degenerated into a source of conflict.
The grand justices are the protectors of the Constitution and have the potential to initiate judicial reform. As the legislature will vote on the nominations tomorrow, legislators need to understand that partisan political concerns should have no bearing on whether or not the nominees as a group should be confirmed.
The new grand justices and the Judicial Yuan's president and vice president must acknowledge the public's wish for an independent judiciary and reform. It's time for the judiciary to look to a truly independent future, not the politically yoked past.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS