I am very disappointed that the Legislative Yuan passed the "March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Statute (
In US criminal procedure, the police investigate, the prosecutors prosecute, the judge acts as referee and the jury convicts. The police and prosecutors are part of the executive branch of government. In court, prosecutors are the plaintiff who represent the people and brings a criminal complaint against certain individuals. There are special laws to protect US citizens, to ensure that the government plaintiff does not use its power and resources against individuals in an unfair way.
The Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution ensures that indictments against individuals for crimes more serious than misdemeanors (where they can be fined over US$1,000 or incarcerated for over six months) are handed down by grand juries rather than just by prosecutors. The same amendment also protects individuals against self-incrimination.
In extraordinary circumstances, such as the assassination of President Kennedy, the investigative procedures did not differ much from the procedures outlined above. The Warren Commission was formed merely to investigate, not to prosecute.
It took an Act of Congress, Senate Joint Resolution 137 (Public Law 88-202) which passed on December 13, 1963, to give the commission the power to subpoena witnesses and obtain evidence concerning any matter relating to the investigation. In cases where there is reason to believe that high-ranking officials might have broken laws, independent prosecutors are appointed by the judicial branch because regular prosecutors are intimidated and have conflicts of interests when they investigate their superiors.
The March 19 Committee to be formed according to the new statute will have the power to investigate. It will create a group of amateur prosecutors who are politically motivated.
The Warren Commission was not formed with the presumption that the assassination victim had broken laws and that a special prosecutor is needed. Even when a special prosecutor is needed, one should be appointed by the judicial branch which, on the surface, is impartial in the eyes of the public. Members of the March 19 Committee will be appointed by political parties rather than appointed by the judicial branch.
The experience of the US in the late 1990s tells us that even independent counsels, who on the surface are impartial, can become mired in politics because they are accountable to no one. The US independent counsel law became heavily criticized and was allowed to expire in 1999. Humans, by their very nature, need to be supervised in order for democracy to work.
The March 19 Committee seems designed to find revenge rather than the truth. It is designed to override all other government agencies, rather than supplement other government agencies, as was the case with the Warren Commission. Article 8, Section 3 of the March 19 Statute requires all government agencies to turn over all materials and evidence to the committee after the statute has been promulgated. This means that the committee has sole and exclusive jurisdiction on this issue.
The committee is also given the power to meddle with the judicial process. Article 13, Section 3 of the statute says, "If the conclusions of this committee run counter to the facts found in a confirmed court ruling, this would serve as grounds for a retrial." The March 19 Committee has the power to go on a witch hunt and reverse any court case that was decided according to long standing legal procedures.
Worse of all, the committee can trample on people's freedoms, disregard property rights, and compromise government secrets. Article 8, Section 4 of the statute states, "The Committee, in the execution of its powers, is not limited by the National Secrets Protection Law, Commercial Secrets Law, Criminal Procedure Law, and other laws."
I find it commendable that many legislators want to investigate the March 19 assassination attempt on the president. However, I hope they can grow up and not taint their hard work through unconstitutional means. Because in a democracy, the ends never justifies the means.
Alfred Tsai
Taipei
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry