President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) removal of Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) was the climax of an obvious political struggle. Ma’s rationale for the surprise attack was that influence peddling has no place in the judicial process, but his all-out assault on Wang will have a worse effect on the development of democracy and a constitutional government than any amount of influence peddling could have.
All the Special Investigation Division (SID) has in its case against Wang are conclusions based on a couple of sentences overheard through possibly illegal wiretapping and its distorted understanding of Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office prosecutor Lin Shiow-tao’s (林秀濤) testimony. Without even concluding its investigation, the SID bypassed the Cabinet and reported the case to Ma and then announced it to the public at a press conference, along with its phone-tapping records. It did so in violation of proper judicial procedure and the Communication Security and Surveillance Act (通訊保障及監察法).
To get rid of Wang, Ma even sacrificed former minister of justice Tseng Yung-fu (曾勇夫), who was forced to resign by Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺). When Tseng asked for a reason, Jiang said there was none. However, the reason was to create the impression that there really was something to the allegations of influence peddling.
Ma never intended to give Wang a chance to defend himself. Prosecutor-General Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) reported the case to Ma on Aug. 31, and Wang went abroad on Sept. 6. Soon after Wang boarded the plane, Huang convened the press conference. Ma had approved Wang’s leave request long before that, so he knew perfectly well that Wang was going to host his daughter’s wedding on an island in Malaysia and would not be able to return ahead of schedule.
That did not stop Ma from telling Wang to quickly return to Taiwan to explain what had happened. The point was to create the impression that Wang felt guilty and did not dare to come back and face the music. Knowing that Wang was returning on Tuesday, Ma arranged for the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Disciplinary Committee to convene and discuss Wang’s case on Wednesday morning, giving Wang little chance to prepare a defense.
The Disciplinary Committee did not inform Wang about this meeting until 11pm on Tuesday, so all he had time to do was write a statement. Before the meeting, Ma held a press conference at which he called on the committee to at least cancel Wang’s party membership, and he was in attendance to see it done. Ma wants Wang out of the KMT, so it was obvious what the decision would be.
Ma keeps talking about upholding due process, but this episode has been all about what Ma wants, with no regard for procedural justice and no reasonable opportunity for Wang to answer the accusations made against him.
From a constitutional point of view, when a president decides to purge the speaker of a nation’s legislature, it is a case of the overseen overthrowing the overseer. Only a dictator treats the leader of the body delegated by the Constitution to represent public opinion in this manner.
Compare Wang’s treatment with the trial of former Chinese Communist Party secretary of Chongqing Bo Xilai (薄熙來). Although the prosecution had a full range of witness and material evidence against him, China still permitted Bo’s trial to be publicly broadcast via the Internet and let Bo prepare, stand in court and speak in his defense.
In contrast, Ma has kicked disobedient legislative speaker Wang out without giving him the chance of a fair trial. Who would have thought Taiwan’s democracy and legal system could fall so low that even China’s looks better in comparison?
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