For years, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government has trumpeted the idea of transitional justice, but it has been hesitant to take the message to the judicial arena for fear of being accused of "political interference.
In light of Tuesday's verdict in the corruption trial of former Taipei mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Judicial independence means that the judiciary is free of interference from any administrative or legislative agencies. It does not mean that the judiciary is exempt from scrutiny or criticism. How can Taiwan progress if our less-than-professional judges cannot be criticized or scrutinized?
During his visit last month, former East German prime minister Lothar de Maiziere discussed how a reunified Germany has dealt with the issue of transitional justice.
After reunification, the Bonn government set up an independent organization to supervise the process. Aside from clearing the names and restoring the reputation of people who were once "blacklisted" by the East German communist regime, Bonn also publicized a list of former informers who then lost the right to serve in government. It required all political parties and their affiliated organizations to put their assets under the trust of an independent commission formed by the prime minister.
De Maiziere also said that 50 percent of the former communist regime's judges were considered unfit for their jobs and were relieved of their duties. If Germany can do this, why can't Taiwan?
It has been 20 years since martial law was lifted in Taiwan. However, a "martial-law" mindset still exists in many areas of the bureaucracy, including the judicial system.
Many in the judiciary attained their current positions as judges or prosecutors after passing countless national examinations. While their efforts and professionalism should be recognized and respected, it is still worth discussing how much of the former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration's party-state mindset still holds sway over these judicial elite who had to memorize and parrot the former regime's party-state ideas in order to pass the tests needed to advance their careers.
To mark the 20th anniversary of the lifting of martial law, the government staged a series of commemorative events, in addition to think tanks holding forums on transitional justice and inviting experts from Hungary, Lithuania and Germany to share their experiences.
However, other than drafting a statute on the disposition of assets improperly obtained by political parties (
It has failed not only to propose bills to clear the names of those once blacklisted by the former KMT regime, but has also failed to propose a plan to bring former informers and "students spies" to justice, let alone overhauling the judicial system.
Whether the DPP administration's lack of action in implementing transitional justice will cost it the presidency next year is not important. What is important is that its lack of action in this regard has hampered Taiwan's path to becoming a healthy democratic country.
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