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.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations