In nations that go through transitional justice, it is common to see criminal lawsuits brought against officials of the previous regime, who are held responsible for the wrongs that were done, as is relieving them of their positions and imposing sanctions on them. Another common practice is providing material compensation to victims and providing a reassessment of the old regime. In short, a rehabilitation of everyone who has suffered under the old regime takes place.
Today, when people talk about transitional justice, it encompasses what could perhaps be called the “millennium compensation movement,” which has been going on for the past few years.
The movement includes compensation demands for property losses from descendants of Jewish victims of the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany; demands for compensation related to human trafficking and slavery; compensation demands related to colonialism — in particular the driving out and slaughter of indigenous peoples; and demands for compensation following a transition of power related to an old regime’s abuse of criminal arrests.
Following developments over the past years, the main method of implementing transitional justice in such nations has been to advocate monetary compensation for losses that have resulted from illegal measures and requiring that all forcefully expropriated assets be returned in their entirety.
In Taiwan, the government used unjust methods to obtain privately owned assets during the White Terror era. Although such cases have not been completely ignored in practice, nothing has been done to address them, either by returning the assets or offering compensation.
The government has been unable to handle such cases, offer compensation, or restore private assets that were unjustly expropriated. Regardless of whether as a result of illegal confiscation or expropriation by the government, or as the result of other unfair practices, such cases remain unresolved.
However, a new method of transitional justice — although perhaps not directly connected to authoritarian governments, but addressing issues arising from illegal government actions — has been receiving attention.
For example, illegal indiscriminate expropriation of privately owned land for the purpose of fabricated public interests or for the benefit of certain big corporations has developed into a new form of state violence. This is an area where transitional justice would be required in Taiwan.
When asked in a private meeting in 1943 why his well-known book The Concept of the Political did not mention the public interest that lies at the core of politics, German political scientist Carl Schmitt said that anyone who mentions bonum commune — the public interest or the public good — is out to cheat and deceive.
Much harm has been done to public assets and the public spirit in the name of patriotism and the public interest. Taiwan could do with both the old and the new versions of transitional justice.
Lin Chia-ho is an associate professor at National Chengchi University’s College of Law.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS