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
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