In response to requests that former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) be released from jail for medical treatment, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) remarked a few days ago that it is a legal issue and not a political one. I am sure the majority of rational people will agree with this. However, we really should ask whether Ma has really viewed the developments in the Chen corruption case from a purely legal perspective.
It would seem that he has not. Ma has interpreted the law to meet his own interests, saying that releasing Chen for medical treatment is tantamount to medical parole and that would be letting him off the hook.
The majority of observers believe that Ma has some very “political” motives and that he is using these ideas to win over deep blue supporters at a time when his public approval rating has fallen to about 20 percent.
If we look back a little further, we see how the pan-blue camp, and this includes Ma, has used Chen as a sure-fire way to win votes.
For example, in this year’s presidential election, the pan-blue camp and Ma spread rumors that the associates of former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) were all members of a corrupt group. Clearly, in Ma’s mind, nothing to do with Chen has ever been only about the law.
This casts doubt on the idea that Chen’s release for medical treatment is purely legal in nature. As a former president, Chen is no ordinary inmate. Any news about Chen is potentially politically explosive. As a result, caution is needed when dealing with the issue and it is understandable why Ma is not willing to give in on this matter.
However, it is precisely because Chen is not an ordinary inmate that there should be more debate on whether he should be subject to normal legal regulations when it comes to his incarceration and medical treatment. To put it more bluntly, hardly an eyebrow would be raised at the news of the death of the average inmate behind bars. However, if that inmate was Chen, it would be an entirely different matter.
In 1955, former general Sun Li-jen (孫立人), notorious for fighting the Japanese in China, was accused of crimes such as “sheltering communist bandits” and “mutiny.” According to the laws of the time, he should have received the death penalty. However, Sun’s status meant that the most then-president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) could do was place him under house arrest for the rest of his life.
Chen should be punished by the law for the crimes he committed. However, as a former president, he does have a special status. This special status also means that it is impossible for politics not to affect his prison sentence, as well as the question of whether he should be released for medical treatment. Politicians of all affiliations are very well aware of this.
This being the case, it is best that we avoid disingenuous statements about the law in an attempt to sweep political issues under the carpet. Chen’s treatment is a political issue and it needs to be recognized as such.
Hsu Yu-fang is a professor of Sinophone literature at National Dong Hwa University.
Translated by Drew Cameron
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
As technological change sweeps across the world, the focus of education has undergone an inevitable shift toward artificial intelligence (AI) and digital learning. However, the HundrED Global Collection 2026 report has a message that Taiwanese society and education policymakers would do well to reflect on. In the age of AI, the scarcest resource in education is not advanced computing power, but people; and the most urgent global educational crisis is not technological backwardness, but teacher well-being and retention. Covering 52 countries, the report from HundrED, a Finnish nonprofit that reviews and compiles innovative solutions in education from around the world, highlights a
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
RSS