It is a shame to realize that you can get away with murder in Taiwan, never reaping the penalties for your misdeeds, at least if you were a senior military officer at the time of the crime.
Former ministers of national defense Chen Chao-min (陳肇敏) and Lee Tien-yu (李天羽), former air force commander-in-chief Huang Hsien-jung (黃顯榮) and the many other military officers involved in the Chiang Kuo-ching (江國慶) travesty of justice can rest assured that they are unlikely to ever see the inside of a courtroom as defendants.
Chiang, a 21-year-old airman, was executed in 1997 for the sexual abuse and murder of a five-year-old girl on an airbase in 1996. Despite a weeks-long investigation and questioning by Taipei police and military police — after a colleague had alleged that Chiang might be involved — the case remained open until Chen ordered the air force’s counterintelligence unit to take over. Chiang was then subjected to 37 hours of interrogation, including physical and psychological torture, and, not surprisingly, he confessed. He was court-martialed and executed.
After years of battling to clear Chiang’s name, his family finally got some relief in May 2010, when the Control Yuan censured a military court over the case, citing seven major flaws in the trial. In January last year, the Ministry of Defense officially issued an apology over the case, while the following month President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) first apologized to the family and then visited them. A retrial finally cleared Chiang’s name in September last year, and the following month the Ministry of National Defense said it would pay NT$103.18 million (US$3.4 million) to the family in compensation.
For Chiang’s mother, Wang Tsai-lien (王彩蓮), money will not make up for her loss. Last year she sued Chen and other military officers for dereliction of duty over her son’s wrongful execution, but the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office decided in May last year that there was nothing it could do to remedy the matter.
It affirmed that decision late last month after Wang appealed, saying that while Chen and the other officers had resorted to torture to extract a confession, it could not intervene in a military trial. As for the allegations of illegal detention and abuse of power leading to a death, the office said that the term of litigating the violations had already expired.
That might be true, but the office then rubbed salt in the family’s wounds by saying that while Chen and the other officers had sought to close the case and win accolades for speedily resolving the much-publicized case, they did not have any intention of killing Chiang.
No intention of killing Chiang? Why the 37 hours of torture and interrogation? What did they think would happen to someone who confessed to the rape and murder of a five-year-old? Did they think a military court, amid all the uproar that the case had generated, was just going to sentence such a defendant to a couple of years in prison? These were career military officers who knew the punishment for infractions of duty as well as more serious charges. Chen clearly set the wheels of injustice turning by referring Chiang’s case to the counterintelligence agency instead of the judiciary, a violation of the Code of Court Martial Procedure.
The spokesperson for the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office said if Wang was dissatisfied with the office’s ruling, she could try to appeal again. It looks like she may have to spend the rest of her life appealing, as the system ensures that the big players remain immune from punishment. It is easier to say sorry than to actually take action to ensure that similar miscarriages of justice do not occur again.
Wang and other members of Chiang’s family waited 14 years for his conviction to be overturned and his name cleared. It looks like they may have to wait much longer, perhaps forever, to see the men responsible for Chiang’s death suitably punished for their egregious dereliction of duty. That is truly shameful.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS