Over the past few months, the Special Investigation Panel that has been investigating allegations of money laundering against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and members of his family has successfully applied to have a series of people taken into custody.
The rank of those detained has risen to include former deputy secretary-general of the Presidential Office Ma Yong-cheng (馬永成) and former National Security Council secretary-general Chiou I-jen (邱義仁), and now Chen himself is behind bars. Chiayi County Commissioner Chen Ming-wen (陳明文) and Yunlin County Commissioner Su Chih-fen (蘇治芬) have also been detained on corruption charges.
The investigations have sometimes been closed and sometimes open, allowing the media to reveal a lot of information about them, while unproved rumors about the cases are circulating everywhere. As a result, more and more people are expressing doubts about the judicial process, and many have accused the prosecution of using pretrial detention as a means to pressure the accused into making confessions.
Times are changing. In the past, pretrial detention was a useful tool in the hands of the prosecution. In recent years, however, the trend in Taiwan has been for the Criminal Procedure Act (刑事訴訟法) to be interpreted in a way that prioritizes the protection of human rights. Are prosecutors clinging to the old way of doing things? There clearly exists a contradiction between the presumption of innocence on the one hand and the system of pretrial detention on the other. This is an issue that can no longer be evaded.
The Judicial Reform Foundation and other civic groups have proposed a list of amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act that would serve to promote human rights. The point of the amendments is to confirm that the purpose of pretrial custody is not to help the prosecution expedite indictments.
It is proposed that the maximum time the accused may be detained for the purpose of investigation should be reduced from four months to 20 days, as in Japan. Such a reduction would give adequate protection to the rights of the accused while still providing reasonable time for criminal investigation. In the interest of reviving public confidence in the judicial system, the proposal deserves serious attention.
Lin Feng-cheng is president of the Judicial Reform Foundation and a lawyer.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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