DEAR PRESIDENT MA
We the undersigned, scholars and writers from the US, Canada, Europe and Australia, consider ourselves long-time supporters of a democratic Taiwan. We write to express our concern regarding the erosion of the judicial system in Taiwan during the past few months.
On two previous occasions we have publicly expressed our concerns to Justice Minister Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), but the minister’s responses are troubling in their persistent failure to acknowledge that there even is a problem, and in their attitude of denial that the judicial process is flawed and partial. We trust that our raising our concerns with you as president will be treated as advice from international supporters of Taiwan’s democracy who care deeply about the country and its future as a free and democratic nation.
First we may mention the fact that your administration has not yet acted upon recommendations — made both by Freedom House and Amnesty International — to conduct an independent inquiry into the events surrounding the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), and in particular the police behavior and infringements on basic freedoms. The establishment of a scrupulously neutral commission is essential if there is to be a fair and objective conclusion on the disturbances that occurred during the Chen Yunlin visit.
Second, we are concerned about the legal proceedings in the case of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). The switch of the case from a three-panel court that released him on his own cognizance on Dec. 13 to a court that subsequently re-incarcerated him on Dec. 25 — both Christmas Day and Constitution Day — seems to have resulted from political pressure from KMT members of the Legislative Yuan. In his commentary in the South China Morning Post of Jan. 8, 2009, professor Jerome Cohen presented details of such political interference in the judicial system, while The Associated Press on Jan. 4 also gave incisive insights in the process that took place.
Third, we are deeply concerned by the widespread pattern of leaks to the media regarding ongoing cases — leaks which because of their content and nature can only have come from the prosecutors’ offices. As was reported by The Associated Press on Jan. 4, 2009, prominent observers in Taiwan such as professor Wang Yeh-lih of National Taiwan University charge that these leaks come from prosecutors who “consistently violated the principle of guarding the details of investigations during the Chen case.”
This pattern of behavior displays a distinct bias in the judicial system and a disregard for fair and impartial processes.
The lack of attention to professional judicial standards reached a new low with the skit by several prosecutors who satirized those whom they are prosecuting. We are disturbed by Minister Wang’s defending this as “just for fun.”
Press agencies quote the minister as saying: “It was just a play to help everybody relax. There’s no reason to take it too seriously.”
In our view the actions by the prosecutors and the comment by Minister Wang display a lack of judicial professionalism and political neutrality.
We reiterate that any cases of alleged corruption must be investigated, and that if the defendants are found guilty in a scrupulously impartial process, they should receive just punishment after trial. We thus emphasize that the political neutrality of the judicial system is a fundamental element in a democracy. The examples mentioned above indicate that the investigative process has been conducted and sensationalized to the extent that both the right of the accused to a fair trial, and the presumption of innocence have been seriously jeopardized. Justice through the rule of law is essential to Taiwan’s efforts to consolidate democracy and protect fundamental human rights.
In addition to the harm done to the personas of those accused, the international image of Taiwan has suffered. A president of a country bears political responsibility for the conduct of his subordinates’ actions, and we therefore urge immediate and decisive action to correct the severe flaws in the process that are staining the national honor, perhaps irreparably.
Taiwan’s judicial system must be not only above suspicion but even above the appearance of suspicion of partiality and political bias. We appeal to you, Mr President, to restore the credibility of the judicial system in Taiwan and ensure that your government and its judiciary and parliamentary institutions safeguard the full democracy, human rights and freedom of expression, for which the Taiwanese people have worked so hard during the past two decades.
Respectfully yours,
Nat Bellocchi,
former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan
Coen Blaauw
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington DC
Stéphane Corcuff
Associate Professor of Political Science, China and Taiwan Studies, University of Lyon, France
Gordon G. Chang
author, “The Coming
Collapse of China”
David Curtis Wright
Associate Professor of History, University of Calgary
June Teufel Dreyer
Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, Florida
Edward Friedman
Professor of Political Science and East Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Mark Harrison
Senior Lecturer, Head of the Chinese School of Asian Languages and Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia
Bruce Jacobs
Professor of Asian Languages and Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
Richard C. Kagan
Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University, St Paul Minnesota. Author, “Taiwan’s Statesman, Lee Teng-hui and Democracy in Asia” and other works on Taiwan
Jerome F. Keating
Associate Professor, National Taipei University (Ret.). Author, “Island in the Stream, a quick case study of Taiwan’s complex history” and other works on Taiwan’s history
Hon. David Kilgour
former Member Parliament and Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific, Canada
Victor H. Mair
Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Pennsylvania
Donald Rodgers
Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College, Texas
Terence Russell
Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Manitoba, Canada
Christian Schafferer
Associate Professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute of Technology, Chair Austrian Association of East Asian Studies, Editor “Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia”
Michael Stainton
York Center for Asia Research, Toronto, Canada
Peter Tague
Professor of Law, Georgetown University, Washington DC
John J. Tkacik Jr
former Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation, Washington DC
Arthur Waldron
Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of Pennsylvania
Vincent Wei-cheng Wang
Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond, Virginia
Gerrit van der Wees
Editor Taiwan Communique, Washington DC
Stephen Yates
President of DC Asia Advisory and former deputy assistant to the vice president for National Security Affairs
Terri Giles
Executive Director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
Daniel Lynch
Associate Professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern California
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