Former Judicial Yuan president Lai In-jaw (賴英照) is widely considered to be knowledgeable and honest. Many were surprised when he tendered his resignation in the wake of allegations of corruption among Taiwan High Court judges, a decision that met with much public displeasure.
Reflecting this surprise, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾) said: “If the Judicial Yuan president had to resign to take responsibility for [alleged] corruption among his subordinates, then why didn’t National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun (王卓鈞) have to resign for police corruption [in Taichung City]?”
It’s a little bit like the ancient Chinese law that punished the family and friends of an offender, according to which both Premier Wu Dun-yih (吳敦義) and Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺), as Wang’s immediate supervisors, should also be held responsible.
Lo also said: “Discipline within Taiwan’s military has long been chaotic, but no national defense minister has resigned to take responsibility. As for the alleged corruption, why didn’t the Control Yuan, which is charged with monitoring the government, see the problem earlier? Doesn’t that mean Control Yuan President Wang Chien-shien (王建煊) should resign? Surely the same standard should apply to all officials, regardless of political affiliation.”
However, Lo appears to have conveniently overlooked other recent scandals, such as why Minister of Transportation and Communications, Mao Chi-kuo (毛治國), wasn’t punished for the recent scandals at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport.
Another issue is Miaoli County Government’s controversial expropriation of farmland in Dapu Borough (大埔), Jhunan Township (竹南), where Jiang, Council of Agriculture Minister Chen Wu-hsiung (陳武雄) and other officials have said only that they will act in accordance with the law. In contrast, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Wu seem to only be concerned by the political ramifications, demanding the KMT County Commissioner, Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻), listen more to the protesters.
In theory, the culture of the judicial system differs from that of other governmental heirarchies because the Judicial Yuan president has no authority to investigate the wrongdoings of judges. Meanwhile, judges issue their verdicts independently and without interference and most demonstrate mutual respect by not meddling in each others cases.
This has been the practice for years. Whenever alleged corruption or misconduct occurs within the judiciary, the Ministry of Justice or a special investigation team under the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office handles the case.
In recent years, scandals involving prosecutors have been frequent. Take the recent case for example. Prosecutor Chiu Mao-jung (邱茂榮), along with three judges, have been detained on suspicion of corruption. However, Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu (曾勇夫) has not taken any responsibility. Ma and Wu simply expressed their deep disappointment and reaffirmed their determination to punish those involved, announcing the establishment of an anti-corruption agency under the Ministry of Justice. Ma has also pledged to build a clean and capable government, yet today his administration is neither.
Over the last two years there has been a palpable sense that the Ma administration is coming apart at the seams and its pursuit of justice has failed in the face of a seemingly endless list of corruption cases. Ma and other key officials have not, however, taken responsibility or apologized for this. Instead, they have passed the buck telling others to step down and making every effort to redirect attention. Former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) corruption scandals, for example, have been continually used as something to hide behind.
Raela Tosh, daughter of World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer, who visited Taiwan earlier this month, said that, “In an authoritarian country, you need to convince the government, but in a free country, it’s more important to convince the people.”
What I would like to know is how Ma intends to convince the people of Taiwan.
Lu I-ming is former publisher and president of Taiwan’s Shin Sheng Daily News.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS