The debates at the Constitutional Court over the constitutionality of the controversial March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Statute (
It goes without saying that the political motivations and political nature of the truth investigation statute and committee are the most fundamental problems for them. The reason that the pan-blue opposition insists on creating such a committee is their belief that the assassination attempt against President Chen Shui-bian (
They stubbornly cling to that belief because otherwise they would have to painfully live with the fact that they were rejected by voters. Under the circumstances, they cannot accept the investigation results of the police and the prosecutors -- the existing law enforcement mechanisms. This is of course ironic, because while there's still much room for improvement, Taiwan's law enforcement and judiciary have never been more transparent and well-monitored -- at least in comparison to the days of authoritarian rule by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Frankly put, the committee was specifically created to accomplish the agenda of denying the legitimacy of Chen's presidency. With that kind of biased mindset and political agenda, it becomes impossible for the investigation committee to be anything but partisan in nature -- and outright unconstitutional.
The partisan nature of the committee is most notably indicated by how its members are chosen -- out of a total of 17 members, each party can appoint a number of members based on its proportional representation in the Legislative Yuan. But the last thing that the people of Taiwan need is a miniature recreation of the Legislative Yuan -- where inter-party rivalry and hatred have trampled and distorted everything. In view of what that's done to the productivity and the credibility of the Legislative Yuan, one can hardly believe that the new committee will be anything but a new playground for politicians. One more question to ask is this -- what is the point of establishing an investigation committee when its political nature has made it unlikely for the general public to believe in its findings?
The fact that the statute creating the special investigation committee is riddled with many egregious violations of the Constitution and basic human rights did not help. For example, the committee is immune from the application of the Criminal Procedural Code. Without any other law in place to safeguard the procedural due process of the actions taken by the committee, flagrant violations of fundamental human rights of the individuals and entities questioned or investigated will take place, including warrantless searches, seizures and detentions.
Moreover, if the investigation results of the committee contradict the factfinding of the courts, that may actually serve as grounds for retrying the case. That of course is a serious violation of the power of the judiciary, which can only disrupt the balance of power between government branches. Other provisions of the special investigation committee are no less troublesome.
The illegality of the statute is so obvious that even the pan-blue camp is talking about amending it in the face of public pressure. If even the pan-blue camp knows and concedes that there are major flaws with the statute and the committee, why insist on immediately kicking off the committee's investigation? This shows how little respect the pan-blue camp has for the very Constitution they claim to hold dear.
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