In the past, some targets of the Chih-ping Project (
These campaign activities have helped them launder their pasts and win the protection of political figures. Legal ambiguities have allowed candidates with criminal backgrounds to deceive the general public, trample judicial integrity and destroy the democractic process.
Defendants on medical leave have often engaged in activities incompatible with the grounds for their bail. The situation was particularly prevalent in the 1998 election for county councilors and county and township magistrates.
As many as eight defendants arrested under the Chih-ping Project ran in that election. I heard stories about how the bony and frail former Chiayi County Deputy Speaker Nien Chung-jen(
We often saw scenes on TV of a feeble and frail detainee leaving the courthouse in a wheelchair, only to subsequently witness his almost instantaneous and miraculous recovery and gleeful participation in protests against judicial injustice. Those scenes were indeed unforgettable.
The trouble was that the law did not mandate a return to custody of detainees on medical leave who recovered or whose health improved markedly.
To deal with detainees who were "worms while in detention, but turned into dragons once out on bail" (
Another amendment mandates that a defendant who has been granted bail must comply with certain conditions or else be returned to custody.
That amendment also provides that if the reason for granting medical leave to a felony defendant no longer exists, then the court may order the defendant returned to custody.
These amendments are quite important to the pursuit of justice and equality, as well as the effective enforcement of law.
However, they also make one wonder whether the courts have been careless about granting medical leave.
Otherwise, how could someone who has been afflicted with so serious a disease that it would be incurable unless he or she were placed on medical leave recuperate in such a short period of time?
Either the defendant was physically superior and therefore capable of a fast recovery, or the grounds for medical leave never existed.
It is very hard to not wonder about the reasons behind the courts' decisions for granting bail. Was "black gold" or political favoritism a factor? The courts appeared to have forgotten the purpose of detention.
According to Article 101 of the Criminal Litigation Code, if a judge has good reasons to suspect that the defendant is either guilty, may escape, might destroy evidence or try to obtain collusive testimony, then the defendant may be placed in custody before the court reaches a verdict.
If a court failed to seriously scrutinize a request for bail in the first place, even if the defendant is returned to detention, he or she might have already destroyed evidence or arranged for collusive testimony. The point of returning the defendant to detention would cease to exist.
The purpose for a criminal law system -- besides exercising the government's authority to punish crime -- is to provide justice and regulate social order.
Therefore, the amendments to the Criminal Litigation Code may be well-intended, but dealing with the root cause of the problems requires strict scrutiny and review of requests for medical leaves.
At the same time, to prevent gangsters from whitewashing themselves through elections, we should also amend the Public Officials Election and Recall Law (公職選舉罷免法) in order to strictly regulate candidate qualifications.
If both of these are accomplished, then we may still be able to salvage the public's trust in our judicial system.
Chu Tai-san is a DPP legislator and the convenor of the Judiciary Committee in the Legislative Yuan.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath