The committee convened by the pan-blue-camp-dominated legislature to investigate the shooting of President Chen Shui-bian (
Two articles of the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Statute (
"The committee formerly enjoyed prosecutorial powers of investigation and the same authority as the Legislative Yuan. This was against the Constitution and has been invalidated," Judicial Yuan Secretary-General Fan Kuang-chun (范光群) quoted the verdict as saying at a press conference yesterday.
The court's constitutional interpretation was the result of an application by 93 Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) lawmakers on Sept. 15.
The lawmakers hoped that the grand justices would rule the statute to be unconstitutional and fully suspend the committee's operations.
But this did not happen.
Referring to the request for suspension, the grand justices ruled, "It is not necessary to discuss whether or not to suspend [the committee] now that the interpretation is available."
In response to the verdict, committee member Yeh Yao-peng (
"The grand justices only care about which government office the committee should belong to," Yeh said. "Their decision will take us further and further away from the truth."
Article Eight and Article Thirteen were the two articles of the statute declared unconstitutional.
Article Eight gave committee members the same powers as prosecutors. The committee was able to summon anyone at any time for questioning and prevent any person from traveling outside the country, including the president and the vice president. Those who refused to comply could have been fined from NT$100,000 to NT$1 million and the fine imposed again if the refusal to cooperate persisted.
Article Thirteen required pros-ecutors to indict any person alleged by the committee to be involved in the case. These cases then had to be heard by the Taiwan High Court rather than lower courts.
But if the high court ruled in favor of the defendant, then the committee was authorized to ask the court to hear the case all over again with the same arguments and evidence and without amending the indictment.
Before yesterday's decision, the committee acted as an independent organization with unlimited administrative and judicial authority.
Such authority is claimed by no other government body.
The grand justices decided to classify the committee as an administrative office under the Legislative Yuan and ordered lawmakers to amend a number of articles to that effect. In the meantime, committee members are now required to be assigned by the legislative speaker. The original statute said the 17 committee members were to be nominated by lawmakers and approved by the president.
Article Four was also ordered to be changed by the grand justices.
That article states that the committee does not fall under government organs and cannot be supervised by them.
The grand justices instead said that the committee must be subject to the authority of the Legislative Yuan.
The grand justices said that Article 9-1 had to be amended as well, because it was inappropriate for committee members to have the power to ask any prosecutor to help with their investigations without the supervision of those prosecutors' superiors.
The grand justices also ruled that committee members must obtain approval from any prosecutor's superior officer before receiving their assistance. In addition, such prosecutors will not be able to utilize their authority as judicial officers while they are helping the committee.
Another offending part of the statute, Article 12-1, states, "The committee is responsible for reporting to and briefing lawmakers and Control Yuan members every three months."
The grand justices said the frequency with which the committee reports to the Control Yuan should be adjusted but did not suggest any particular timeframe.
As for another offending element, Article 15-1, the grand justices said that any changes to the composition of the committee had to be submitted to the legislative speaker for final approval before it takes effect.
In addition, the grand justices said that before the required changes are made to the statute, the committee shall not proceed with its investigations.
Also see story:
SEPARATE: The MAC rebutted Beijing’s claim that Taiwan is China’s province, asserting that UN Resolution 2758 neither mentions Taiwan nor grants the PRC authority over it The “status quo” of democratic Taiwan and autocratic China not belonging to each other has long been recognized by the international community, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) said yesterday in its rebuttal of Beijing’s claim that Taiwan can only be represented in the UN as “Taiwan, Province of China.” Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) yesterday at a news conference of the third session at the 14th National People’s Congress said that Taiwan can only be referred to as “Taiwan, Province of China” at the UN. Taiwan is an inseparable part of Chinese territory, which is not only history but
NATIONAL SECURITY: The Chinese influencer shared multiple videos on social media in which she claimed Taiwan is a part of China and supported its annexation Freedom of speech does not allow comments by Chinese residents in Taiwan that compromise national security or social stability, the nation’s top officials said yesterday, after the National Immigration Agency (NIA) revoked the residency permit of a Chinese influencer who published videos advocating China annexing Taiwan by force. Taiwan welcomes all foreigners to settle here and make families so long as they “love the land and people of Taiwan,” Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) told lawmakers during a plenary session at the Legislative Yuan in Taipei. The public power of the government must be asserted when necessary and the Ministry of
CROSSED A LINE: While entertainers working in China have made pro-China statements before, this time it seriously affected the nation’s security and interests, a source said The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) late on Saturday night condemned the comments of Taiwanese entertainers who reposted Chinese statements denigrating Taiwan’s sovereignty. The nation’s cross-strait affairs authority issued the statement after several Taiwanese entertainers, including Patty Hou (侯佩岑), Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜) and Michelle Chen (陳妍希), on Friday and Saturday shared on their respective Sina Weibo (微博) accounts a post by state broadcaster China Central Television. The post showed an image of a map of Taiwan along with the five stars of the Chinese flag, and the message: “Taiwan is never a country. It never was and never will be.” The post followed remarks
Proposed amendments would forbid the use of all personal electronic devices during school hours in high schools and below, starting from the next school year in August, the Ministry of Education said on Monday. The Regulations on the Use of Mobile Devices at Educational Facilities up to High Schools (高級中等以下學校校園行動載具使用原則) state that mobile devices — defined as mobile phones, laptops, tablets, smartwatches or other wearables — should be turned off at school. The changes would stipulate that use of such devices during class is forbidden, and the devices should be handed to a teacher or the school for safekeeping. The amendments also say
RSS