In nations that go through transitional justice, it is common to see criminal lawsuits brought against officials of the previous regime, who are held responsible for the wrongs that were done, as is relieving them of their positions and imposing sanctions on them. Another common practice is providing material compensation to victims and providing a reassessment of the old regime. In short, a rehabilitation of everyone who has suffered under the old regime takes place.
Today, when people talk about transitional justice, it encompasses what could perhaps be called the “millennium compensation movement,” which has been going on for the past few years.
The movement includes compensation demands for property losses from descendants of Jewish victims of the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany; demands for compensation related to human trafficking and slavery; compensation demands related to colonialism — in particular the driving out and slaughter of indigenous peoples; and demands for compensation following a transition of power related to an old regime’s abuse of criminal arrests.
Following developments over the past years, the main method of implementing transitional justice in such nations has been to advocate monetary compensation for losses that have resulted from illegal measures and requiring that all forcefully expropriated assets be returned in their entirety.
In Taiwan, the government used unjust methods to obtain privately owned assets during the White Terror era. Although such cases have not been completely ignored in practice, nothing has been done to address them, either by returning the assets or offering compensation.
The government has been unable to handle such cases, offer compensation, or restore private assets that were unjustly expropriated. Regardless of whether as a result of illegal confiscation or expropriation by the government, or as the result of other unfair practices, such cases remain unresolved.
However, a new method of transitional justice — although perhaps not directly connected to authoritarian governments, but addressing issues arising from illegal government actions — has been receiving attention.
For example, illegal indiscriminate expropriation of privately owned land for the purpose of fabricated public interests or for the benefit of certain big corporations has developed into a new form of state violence. This is an area where transitional justice would be required in Taiwan.
When asked in a private meeting in 1943 why his well-known book The Concept of the Political did not mention the public interest that lies at the core of politics, German political scientist Carl Schmitt said that anyone who mentions bonum commune — the public interest or the public good — is out to cheat and deceive.
Much harm has been done to public assets and the public spirit in the name of patriotism and the public interest. Taiwan could do with both the old and the new versions of transitional justice.
Lin Chia-ho is an associate professor at National Chengchi University’s College of Law.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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.
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