Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) wrote a letter to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) from the Taipei Detention Center last month, imploring him to help remove the overseas travel restrictions placed on his daughter Chen Hsing-yu (陳幸妤). In response to the letter, Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said that not commenting on individual judicial cases has always been the office’s stance and that it is impossible for Ma to interfere in any judicial decision.
Wang said that the president, with his supreme administrative power, has to act with caution and without interfering in judicial power. I certainly agree with this spirit and principle 100 percent.
However, the Constitution allows interaction between administrative and judicial powers. Ma can “interfere” in several ways.
At the level of direct judicial interference, the president has the power to grant pardons. This is a typical example of how the president can use his executive power to intervene in socially or politically controversial cases. It is a presidential right that needs neither the legislature’s consent nor the Judicial Yuan’s endorsement.
There are two kinds of past examples. The descendants of key officials who have made extraordinary contributions to Taiwan — the murderer Huang Hsiao-hsien (黃效先), for example, was pardoned by dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) thanks to the great achievements of Huang’s father General Huang Pai-tao (黃百韜). Political prisoners or prisoners of conscience who commit crimes for “good causes” — those who refuse to perform their military service because of religious beliefs, labor activists, or people such as “rice bomber” Yang Ju-men (楊儒門).
In addition, the president has the power to grant amnesties and the remission of sentences for specific types of cases. Pardons are for individual cases, but amnesties and remission of sentences are for specific types of crimes with broader implications and they can only be implemented with the approval of the Cabinet and the legislature.
Next, the president can interfere with the ongoing creation of legislation through his power to appoint judicial personnel. He can nominate the Judicial Yuan president and grand justices, all important judicial leaders. Grand justices interpret the Constitution and these interpretations control how the law is applied.
US presidents often attempt to create a legal environment favorable to themselves through the nomination of justices. Although they do not necessarily always get what they want, they can at least secure the legal basis of their policies by nominating judicial personnel who share their stance.
Taiwan’s president is endowed with the same constitutional power and there is no need to hide the fact that all presidents have the same idea.
Finally, there is judicial reform policy and legislation. Ma will now serve concurrently as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman, the nation’s highest administrative leader and the leader of the largest party in the legislature. He can, through the Ministry of Justice, demand that the ethics of the prosecutorial system be corrected and that corrupt and unethical judicial personnel be arrested. He can also push legislation on judicial reform through the legislature.
The president can interfere with the judiciary based on the Constitution, because the separation of powers were intended to make it possible to balance judicial power with administrative power. Particularly on the policy and legislative level, I hope the president will interfere with the judiciary more frequently in order to advance the judicial system.
Chiang Ya-chi is a doctoral student at the University of Leeds’ School of Law.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
In a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, titled “The Upside on Uncertainty in Taiwan,” Johns Hopkins University professor James B. Steinberg makes the argument that the concept of strategic ambiguity has kept a tenuous peace across the Taiwan Strait. In his piece, Steinberg is primarily countering the arguments of Tufts University professor Sulmaan Wasif Khan, who in his thought-provoking new book The Struggle for Taiwan does some excellent out-of-the-box thinking looking at US policy toward Taiwan from 1943 on, and doing some fascinating “what if?” exercises. Reading through Steinberg’s comments, and just starting to read Khan’s book, we could already sense that