On Dec. 5, the Supreme Court handed down a guilty verdict in the long-running court case against former minister of transportation and communications Kuo Yao-chi (郭瑤琪), who served in 2006 under then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Kuo has a master’s degree in urban planning from the University of London.
In 2008, in the early years of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, she and many other former DPP officials were accused of corruption and charged.
In some cases, such as that of former president Chen, this led to conviction and imprisonment.
However, the trial and treatment of the former president had clear political overtones. In contrast, many other trials led to acquittal.
In Kuo’s case, legal proceedings dragged on for years. In her first and second trials in 2009 and 2010, before the Taipei District Court and by the Taiwan High Court respectively, she was declared not guilty.
Prosecutors continued to appeal, and in two retrials before the Taiwan High Court, in 2011 and in a second this year, she was found guilty.
The case against her, however, was based on the testimony of a single witness, Lee Tsung-hsien (李宗賢), son of Lee Ching-po (李清波), who is the chairman of Nan Ren Hu Group, a large industrial conglomerate with close connections to the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
Lee Tsung-hsien had initially testified on behalf of his father that he had delivered the equivalent of US$20,000 in cash packed in two iron tea boxes to the then-minister.
However, he later revoked his testimony, and during a raid on the former minister’s home, prosecutors did not find any tea boxes or cash.
The accusation against former minister Kuo that she took money from the Nan Ren Hu chairman is highly peculiar, as Nan Ren Hu did not bid for government procurement during that period.
The conclusion by the High Court and Supreme Court that there was a quid pro quo relationship is even more astounding.
The political bias of the courts is evident, as Kuo has now been convicted of accepting an amount equivalent to US$20,000, while in the case of the former Executive Yuan secretary-general Lin Yi-shih (林益世), the courts mysteriously dropped the corruption charges despite prosecutors having seized large amounts of cash from Lin’s home.
Lin had been charged with bribery in the amount of at least US$2.1 million, which is more than 100 times the amount that Kuo allegedly accepted.
The Formosan Association for Public Affairs is convinced that this is yet another case of judicial system abuse by the Ma administration: Going after members of the previous DPP administration of former president Chen while whitewashing serious crimes within its own ranks.
We have documented about 48 cases against former and current DPP officials that can be considered political persecution.
As Taiwanese-Americans, we appeal to the government and Congress of the US to express their concern about this erosion of justice and lack of fairness in Taiwan’s judicial system.
Taiwan can only be a strong democracy if its judicial institutions adhere to the basic principles of fairness and due process of law.
Mark Kao is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs, a Taiwanese-American grassroots organization based in Washington.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Last week, Nvidia chief executive officer Jensen Huang (黃仁勳) unveiled the location of Nvidia’s new Taipei headquarters and announced plans to build the world’s first large-scale artificial intelligence (AI) supercomputer in Taiwan. In Taipei, Huang’s announcement was welcomed as a milestone for Taiwan’s tech industry. However, beneath the excitement lies a significant question: Can Taiwan’s electricity infrastructure, especially its renewable energy supply, keep up with growing demand from AI chipmaking? Despite its leadership in digital hardware, Taiwan lags behind in renewable energy adoption. Moreover, the electricity grid is already experiencing supply shortages. As Taiwan’s role in AI manufacturing expands, it is critical that
RSS