“The horse does not know how long his face is.”
This Chinese saying applies to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and the responsibility he bears for Taiwan’s growing human rights problems and erosion of justice — all this after barely seven months into his tenure.
No, Ma may not know how long his face is, but more and more of Taiwan’s citizens do, as well as international organizations.
A quick way to see the greater degree of abuse under Ma is to examine the differences in how the accused were treated in three high-profile cases under former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and contrast them with Chen’s treatment under Ma.
Let’s start with the case of James Soong (宋楚瑜), a former provincial governor and the founder of the People First Party (PFP).
During Lee’s tenure, Soong was not only indicted but found guilty of money-laundering and misuse of funds on several occasions.
Was he handcuffed and hauled off to jail prior to any indictments being issued against him, as happened to Chen? Was Soong held incommunicado like Chen? Was Soong even jailed after being found guilty?
No. Soong always enjoyed the freedom to meet and strategize with whomever he wanted. In the end, what horrendous punishment was given to him? He paid back taxes on undeclared income and went on to tour the many properties he owns in the US.
Next, let’s look at the money-laundering case involving Ma, who was indicted during Chen’s time as president.
Ma never suffered the indignities meted out to Chen.
Was Ma cuffed? Was Ma held incommunicado? No.
He was not only allowed to walk around freely and consult with all of his staff and potentially his fellow indictees, but also to announce his run for the presidency.
Not bad, not bad at all.
Of course, Ma was found not guilty, but what most people forget is that Ma’s secretary was found guilty of money-laundering and putting around half a million NT dollars into Ma’s account.
That secretary is now in jail. Ah, yes, what politician would not wish to have such a loyal secretary?
Given that Chen was cuffed, taken to a detention center and held incommunicado some six months after he left the Presidential Office — without being indicted — it takes some nerve to say that all are still equal before the law.
Prosecutors have tried to justify their actions by saying they were afraid Chen would threaten witnesses and/or would flee the country.
But even Ma’s former law professor and mentor, Jerome Cohen, has criticized the large number of arrests of Democratic Progressive Party figureheads without indictment.
Stretching the spirit of the presumption of innocence, the prosecutors swore that they would resign if they could not indict Chen before the end of the year.
If threatening witnesses or fleeing the country were serious options, Chen had ample time to take them up.
After Chen was indicted, weeks after his detention, he was released without bail — but the prosecutors would not let go. They continued to demand imprisonment, and got their way after three attempts — which required the removal of the Taipei District Court judge who did not take their concerns very seriously.
These high-profile examples are the tip of the iceberg.
The more telling development is how, in a scant seven months, numerous human rights organizations have protested what is happening under the Ma administration. This volume of protest never happened during the 12 years of Lee’s presidency or during the eight years of Chen’s. But Ma has managed to pull it off within a year.
The organizations, international and local, that have protested include Amnesty International, Reporters without Borders, the International Federation of Human Rights, Freedom House, the Taiwan Bar Association, the Taipei Bar Association and Judicial Reform Foundation, the Taiwan Association of Human Rights, the Formosan Association of Human Rights, the Presbyterian Church of Taiwan, the Canadian Human Rights Association, 15 US congressmen, a joint statement by 20 academics and writers from around the world, the North American Taiwanese Professors Association, the Taiwan Association of University Professors and Taiwan’s Wild Strawberry Student Movement.
This is quite an impressive list of objectors at a time when most newly elected politicians enjoy a perfunctory honeymoon period.
No, “the horse does not know how long his face is,” and he is doing his best not to look in the mirror. All that remains for Ma is to control the media — but then, hasn’t this already started?
Ma’s phoniness has always been there for anyone willing to look for it over the years, but now gullible Taiwanese and perhaps even the rest of the world are beginning to see the reality of Taiwan’s one-trick pony.
The other day, I was talking to a friend who said that Ma’s growing incompetence pointed to behavior that has long gone out of fashion. The only trick left that Ma knows is how to run to China.
He parted the Red Sea of Chinese tourism, but despite all the promises, virtually no one has come through to bring relief to Taiwan’s economic woes.
Those in the know knew it would fail even if thousands did come; their poor numbers, however, have only exacerbated Ma’s image of incompetence.
With such poor strategy and pitiful results, the Ma administration can only seek refuge in even more outlandish promises while wallowing in the wishes of yesteryear.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS