The death of army corporal Hung Chung-chiu (洪仲丘), who allegedly died as a result of abuse while serving in the military, has brought shame on the armed forces, forced President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to issue an apology and prompted a government minister to resign — and the affair has yet to come to an end.
If the case had been handed to the Taoyuan District Prosecutors’ Office right from the outset, to be heard in a civilian court, the public’s rage would not have reached the level it has.
If the case had been heard within the civilian judicial system instead of being referred to a military court, not only would the public have had faith in its outcome, it would also have better guarantee the rights of the defendants.
Many countries, including Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden, do not have military courts at all.
Neither does Germany, which has learned the lessons of its Nazi past and declined to set them up in the post-World War II period, even though its constitution allows it.
In the immediate post-war period, when Germany was divided into east and west, the lack of military courts did little to dampen the either side’s resolve to operate a national defense force.
Neither has the lack of a military judiciary affected the German military’s participation in overseas conflicts after East and West Germany were reunified.
Apparently, whether a country has a military court has little bearing on national defense issues.
The biggest problem with military courts is that members of the armed forces have sworn to serve, but judges need to be independent, which causes a conflict when these two demands co-exist in the person of a military judge. This conflict can be fatal.
The legislature has now been called for an extraordinary session in the fallout of the Hung case, with both the ruling and opposition parties proposing amendments to the Code of Court Martial Procedure (軍事審判法).
According to media reports, the parties’ proposals are based on differentiating between wartime and peacetime, such that during peacetime any cases would be referred to civilian courts, whereas the case of any member of the armed forces committing a crime during wartime would be dealt with by a military court.
However, even during wartime, a military judge would still wield judicial powers and even in wartime judges must not shirk on due process of law.
At the moment, all appointments and qualifications of judges in military courts are made by the Ministry of National Defense, which answers only to the Cabinet.
To say that military courts in this form have judicial powers and judicial independence is simply not true.
The current version of the Martial Law (戒嚴法) stipulates that once martial law is declared, 10 crimes — including fomenting civil unrest, foreign aggression, disrupting social order, causing danger to the public and offenses against all special criminal statutes — will be handed to military courts to be tried.
During the White Terror era, many trials were conducted in military courts, among them the prosecution of the Taiwan democracy pioneer Lei Chen (雷震) and the Kaohsiung Incident tribunal, and these were quickly processed and wrapped up, with utter disregard for human rights.
The lesson is easily drawn. If Taiwan continues to maintain military courts, it will allow unscrupulous politicians to abuse their power to eliminate political dissidents.
Taiwan is a tiny, densely populated country, with one local court — in some cases several courts — in every city or county.
Crimes committed by members of the armed forces are not a rare occurrence, and these are regularly investigated by district prosecutors’ offices and heard in district courts without difficulty.
If military courts are abolished, members of the military judiciary could be asked to assist in trials or act as legal consultants provided by the armed forces.
They could even become judges, if they manage to pass the national examinations.
Neither should it be too difficult for judges from ordinary courts to apply the military’s criminal code.
Also, there would no longer be the contradiction of matters of fact being heard in military courts, while matters of law are ruled upon by the Supreme Court.
The only way to ensure that the armed forces regain their reputation for being above reproach and protect the rights and interests of members of the armed forces is to return to a solely civilian judiciary.
If the legislature allows this opportunity to slip away, if it fails to find a way to resolve the issues that have long plagued our country — the problems with the military and the two-tier judicial system — it will be consigning the military trial system to an end.
Huang Cheng-yi is an assistant research professor in Academia Sinica’s Institutum Iurisprudentiae.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs