On Aug. 24, the Legislative Yuan passed the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and People First Party (PFP) version of the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Statute (三一九槍擊事件真相調查特別委員會條例), which drew massive criticism and questions from many directions. For the general public, the key point about this statute -- which has now been written into clear legal language and passed into law -- is that it will seriously violate the human rights of anyone who may be under investigation.
Even though independent Legislator Su Ying-kuei (
He then refused to take responsibility for his accusation by divulging who the two grand justices were. Instead he tried to use it to destroy the credibility of future constitutional interpretations delivered by the Council of Grand Justices. This move casts doubt on Su's image as a "human rights lawyer," and it also raises grave concerns about his appointment to Taipei City's Human Rights Commission.
Su boasts of being a protector of human rights, and in the past he has criticized practices in the judicial system. He once said, "In Taiwan, courts are the places least able to tell right from wrong. This is not a problem of laws, it's a problem of people. But saying so is unfair to the vast majority of judges, so maybe we should say that it's a systemic problem."
I still hear these words ringing in my ears. But surprisingly, Su did not try to block the vicious March 19 statute, and he even helped assure its passage, to the detriment of human rights. To our surprise, this man serves as vice chairman of Taipei City's Human Rights Commission. As a Taipei City councilor, I cannot help but break into a cold sweat on behalf of Taipei residents.
To guarantee the human rights of Taipei residents now and in the future, I want to ask Su's advice on some important issues, in the hope that he will be able to dispel Taipei residents' confusion by clearly explaining his position.
First, Article 8 of the March 19 statute says that "the Committee, in the execution of its powers, is not limited by the Law of National Secrets Protection (國家機密保護法), Trade Secrets Act (營業秘密法), Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法) or other laws. Summoned organizations, groups or individuals may not use national secrets, trade secrets or investigation secrets as reasons to avoid, delay or refuse to appear ... In case of violation of Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4 or 6, the organization's leader as well as the perpetrator shall be given a fine of no less than NT$100,000 and no more than NT$1 million. The committee may continue to issue fines to anyone who continues to violate these regulations ... Should this Committee, or members executing the powers of the Committee, deem it necessary, the person under investigation or concerned individuals may be prohibited from leaving the country."
If the committee feels it has to investigate a Taipei resident, the above regulations mean that this resident could be issued consecutive fines and be restricted from leaving the country for protecting trade secrets. If this inability to leave the country to conduct business induces losses and the person lodges a complaint with Taipei's Human Rights Commission, what would Su's verdict be?
Second, if a city resident does not want to provide information in order to protect his or her privacy, the committee may directly enter the individual's home or office to conduct a search, and it does not need a search warrant from a prosecutor or court to do so.
What will Su do to help these residents uphold their rights and interests and get a fair treatment when their reputation, lives and even financial assets have been negatively affected? And how will the Human Rights Commission handle cases where female Taipei residents have been sexually harassed or even assaulted during body searches by male investigators appointed by the Special Committee?
The powers bestowed by this statute are completely unlimited, restricted by no law or institution. This means that if any Taipei resident under investigation has their rights violated, not only will Su be unable to do anything, but even Ma will have to stand by and watch as the human rights of city residents are trampled on. Su owes the public an explanation.
Not only does the March 19 statute violate human rights, it exceeds the powers bestowed by martial law during the Chiang family rule. There are absolutely no limitations to the committee's tenure, budget or powers, and no one can overturn the selection of committee members. In the future, then, Taiwan will be in the preposterous situation of having one president and 17 emperors.
This situation would even have Chiang Kai-shek (
Hsu Chia-ching is a Democratic Progressive Party Taipei City Council member.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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