Judiciaries and members of parliament around the world that respect the rule of law are loath to present commentary to the media on cases that are before the courts or other investigative bodies.
The reasons for this should be obvious to people with no knowledge of judicial practice, but in Taiwan, where concepts of due process and natural justice are quite weak, such behavior does not have the poor reputation that would provoke an angry response from the legal fraternity.
Public disenchantment with or suspicion toward the law is widespread and perfectly understandable: It has only been a few years since courts were able to break free of political manipulation and gradually learn to exercise independence, consistency and proportionality in their verdicts.
While the judiciary has been spending years gathering the momentum to undertake reforms that strengthen the rule of law and allow it to apply consistently, the legislature has all too frequently treated punitive amendments to the law as their personal playthings — including as weapons to punish rivals or anyone else if a political jackpot looms.
Now, with a typically cynical line-up of legislators back in town and the latest batch of Control Yuan officials in place under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration, we are beginning to see omens of regression as far as the law is concerned.
The Control Yuan, the oversight body shut down for years by the KMT-dominated legislature over disputed appointments, has among its members a former Taiwan Solidarity Union legislator, Chien Lin Hui-chun (錢林慧君). Chien Lin, in her zeal for punishing errant public servants, has suggested a law be introduced that would strip pensions for certain offenses after an incident involving the former head of the Investigation Bureau, Yeh Sheng-mao (葉盛茂).
This is despite the fact that, though indicted, Yeh has not been found guilty of any crime and is yet to be impeached. If Yeh had already been convicted over allegations that he withheld information from prosecutors relating to former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) finances, Chien Lin’s comments might have been appropriate.
It is all too easy for Chien Lin, a former politician, to make use of the powers of oversight and lobbying legislators to make public statements while cases are in progress.
More worrying is that such language should go unchallenged among Chien Lin’s colleagues.
Then again, expectations were never very high given that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) appointed the former leader of a fringe political party to the Control Yuan’s top post.
Ma’s much vaunted legal expertise will amount to naught if he ends up being responsible for selecting an oversight body whose members abuse their politicking skills and stoke a media frenzy for reasons unconnected to their responsibilities.
If this kind of behavior represents the aptitude of Control Yuan members overseeing government, then it will only be so long before the expression “the law is an ass” will apply.
In this case a beast of burden is an appropriate metaphor, with the poor animal being used by politicians and ideologues not to cultivate a just and balanced society but to turn complex processes of investigation and accountability into media sound bites.
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