The Ministry of Justice’s Agency of Corrections on Monday rejected former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) application for medical parole. However, in an unusual move, Minister of Justice Luo Ying-shay (羅瑩雪) made three suggestions: that Chen could file another appeal to the Taipei District Court, lodge an objection with the Taiwan High Court, or ask the corrections agency for a new diagnosis. This has fueled hopes that another petition could be approved, and, as the world marked International Human Rights Day yesterday, could be seen as a positive development.
In the eyes of many Taiwanese, there are many different aspects to the Chen case. For his supporters, his imprisonment is a political sentence, a case of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) persecuting a political enemy. For them it is a symbol of polarization between the pan-blue and pan-green camps. In the eyes of Chen’s opponents, he is paying the price for corruption and abuse of power while in office, and his sentence is a matter of justice that cannot be negotiated.
For political scientists, the fact that a former president is in prison is unhelpful to national reconciliation. For a prison manager, the rules for medical parole are clear cut: Unless a prisoner is bedridden and unable to move, it would be very difficult to meet these requirements, and as they see it, Chen is far from meeting this condition. For doctors, Chen’s mental and physical health is deteriorating, and medical treatment at home would be the most appropriate solution.
Everyone has a different interpretation of Chen’s situation, and they will suggest different ways to handle the case, but the most appropriate approach would be to follow public opinion.
According to Taipei Veterans General Hospital physician Kuo Cheng-tien (郭正典), who recently saw Chen, the former president suffers from severe brain degeneration, dementia, incontinence and coughing that, if severe, could lead to asphyxia and death.
One can only wonder what has happened to human dignity when an old, decrepit man whose hands and legs are shaking, cannot speak clearly, drools and is incontinent is locked up in a small cell without proper medical attention. Moreover, that person is a former president and not even those who hated him feel happy when they see that all that remains of a man who once used to lead the nation with vigor and energy being nothing more than a candle weakly flickering in the wind.
Chen has been deprived of his freedom for six years, and it is time to let him go home. His family and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are now being joined in their calls by more members of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) top leadership, with New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫), Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) urging leniency.
The Constitution protects the president from criminal prosecution during his or her term, although illegal actions can be prosecuted after a president steps down. Former US president Gerald Ford pardoned his predecessor, Richard Nixon, in 1974, and in 1997, then-South Korean president Kim Young-sam pardoned former president Chun Doo-hwan. These presidents focused on protecting national dignity and promoting domestic political reconciliation.
As the lack of proper treatment for Chen and word of his difficult situation spread domestically and internationally, the seeds of hatred are planted. In Taipei’s political circles, a rumor is now spreading that Ma, with his extremely low support rating, fears that he will become the victim of retaliation and be sent to prison if the DPP gains power when he steps down. Such worries are evidence that Taiwan’s political culture and democratic system are strongly distorted, and that Ma’s treatment of Chen is what lies behind it all. It is high time to change the political culture, turn the struggle into reconciliation and let an old man return home to get the medical treatment he needs.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS