Since he was released on bail, former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) has not publicly urged his former secretary Hsu Chih-yu (許芷瑜) to return to Taiwan to clarify details about the corruption scandal he faces. Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Acting Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) has not called for her to return either.
The TPP only shouts about judicial persecution while disregarding the law. As a legislator himself, Huang is leading the TPP’s young supporters to challenge the seriousness of the judiciary.
Former representative to Japan Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), who is President William Lai’s (賴清德) senior adviser, recently compared the Taiwanese judicial system with Japan’s, saying it was like comparing apples with oranges. The guilty plea rate among corrupt officials in Japan is rather high, while in Taiwan such officials prefer to lie and destroy evidence.
However, when offenders in Taiwan plead guilty, the rate of conviction is 99.9 percent, the same as Japan’s.
The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office says it has enough evidence to prove that Ko took money he should not have — although it has yet to find out where the cash went. It says there was likely a quid pro quo to increase the floor area ratio of the Core Pacific City project, which is why Ko has been indicted.
The alleged behavior meets the definition of corruption and acceptance of bribes.
Perhaps Ko’s supporters could check the statements of Shao Hsiu-pei (邵琇珮), the executive secretary of the Taipei Urban Planning Commission, who was forced to break the law after seeing Ko during his time as Taipei mayor bully disobedient civil servants by threatening that they would “never be hired again.”
After reading the indictment, Huang has bullied the judiciary, challenged the rule of law and besmirched the public’s intelligence. He is the most despicable character in this situation.
Chu Meng-hsiang is a former deputy secretary-general of the Lee Teng-hui Foundation.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) said that he expects this year to be a year of “peace.” However, this is ironic given the actions of some KMT legislators and politicians. To push forward several amendments, they went against the principles of legislation such as substantive deliberation, and even tried to remove obstacles with violence during the third readings of the bills. Chu says that the KMT represents the public interest, accusing President William Lai (賴清德) and the Democratic Progressive Party of fighting against the opposition. After pushing through the amendments, the KMT caucus demanded that Legislative Speaker
On New Year’s Day, it is customary to reflect on what the coming year might bring and how the past has brought about the current juncture. Just as Taiwan is preparing itself for what US president-elect Donald Trump’s second term would mean for its economy, national security and the cross-strait “status quo” this year, the passing of former US president Jimmy Carter on Monday at the age of 100 brought back painful memories of his 1978 decision to stop recognizing the Republic of China as the seat of China in favor of the People’s Republic of China. It is an
Beijing’s approval of a controversial mega-dam in the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo River — which flows from Tibet — has ignited widespread debate over its strategic and environmental implications. The project exacerbates the complexities of India-China relations, and underscores Beijing’s push for hydropower dominance and potential weaponization of water against India. India and China are caught in a protracted territorial dispute along the Line of Actual Control. The approval of a dam on a transboundary river adds another layer to an already strained bilateral relationship, making dialogue and trust-building even more challenging, especially given that the two Asian
RSS