When the new legislative session starts at the end of the month, Premier William Lai (賴清德), who took office on Friday last week, will have to face legislators in general question-and-answer sessions.
A lot of people are wondering how he will handle questions about labor issues and pension reform for military personnel.
Apart from these issues, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus will prioritize legislation related to judicial reform, and it intends to enact some of the organizational restructuring and other proposals made by the National Congress on Judicial Reform, which held its summary meeting on Aug. 12.
This will fulfill one of the campaign pledges made by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) before she was elected, namely to make the judiciary into one that the public can trust.
This is an appropriate time to remind the legislature that it must rid the justice system of the toxins left over from the authoritarian era. Only then can the judiciary gain the trust of the public.
The regimes of former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) froze all kinds of rules that provided people with safeguards, turning the judiciary into a band of henchmen who helped the dictatorship get rid of its political opponents.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) happily used all kinds of rewards to absorb the entire judiciary into its web of complicity.
For example, for a long time the KMT collaborated with entities such as the Four Seas Gang and the Bamboo Union, and established a symbiotic relationship between prosecutors and organized crime.
Until quite recently, it was still quite common to hear reports about law enforcement officials shielding vice and gambling rackets, as well as obstructing investigations and evidence gathering.
In one of her speeches, Tsai asked rhetorically whether everyone who lived under authoritarian rule chose to be obedient.
During the authoritarian period, principles that apply in countries under the rule of law were shelved. From the point of view of human nature, one would not expect law enforcement officials of those days to stand up and resist tyranny.
Nowadays we enjoy freedom and the rule of law, but it still seems unlikely that judicial personnel who are used to obeying could, within a short time, break free of the bad habits formed over many long years and learn how to investigate and judge cases independently.
The way in which a judge was summarily replaced in the case against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the opaque manner in which prosecutors and the Special Investigation Division conducted the investigation involving then-legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) and DPP Legislator Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) are solid proof that some judicial personnel still do not act independently.
This is even more true of police officers, who serve on the judicial system’s front line.
When a student at a police training institute posted comments online criticizing people protesting pension reform, several former students of the institute threatened to make sure that the poster would not last in the police force.
The institute did nothing about the threats.
The police’s treatment of protests by retired former students compared with how they dealt with ordinary members of the public makes it hard for people to believe that such an organization can resist interference by its superiors or other powerful people.
Furthermore, it is well known that forbears’ traditions have greater weight than teaching about the rule of law at the Central Police University and the Taiwan Police College.
How can police who have been trained like this gain trust?
Of course, it is undeniable that judicial personnel have in recent years made considerable progress in terms of independence and professionalism. Nonetheless, the most pressing issue for judicial reform is how to excise the culture of obedience, which is a holdover from the authoritarian era that is still pervasive among judicial personnel, as well as the complicity that allows all kinds of outside interference.
Only by making a clean break with authoritarianism can the judiciary overcome the memories that have been deeply implanted in people’s minds over the decades.
There are three fundamental suggestions for lawmakers who claim to give high priority to judicial reform:
First, improve and oversee the independence of judicial personnel.
Second, eliminate the pervasive culture of obedience among judicial personnel.
Third, deconstruct the webs of complicity left over from the authoritarian era.
If the toxic legacy of authoritarianism in the judiciary keeps being overlooked, judicial reform will never succeed.
Lau Yi-te is chairman of the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Julian Clegg
With its passing of Hong Kong’s new National Security Law, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) continues to tighten its noose on Hong Kong. Gone is the broken 1997 promise that Hong Kong would have free, democratic elections by 2017. Gone also is any semblance that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) plays the long game. All the CCP had to do was hold the fort until 2047, when the “one country, two systems” framework would end and Hong Kong would rejoin the “motherland.” It would be a “demonstration-free” event. Instead, with the seemingly benevolent velvet glove off, the CCP has revealed its true iron
At the end of last month, Paraguayan Ambassador to Taiwan Marcial Bobadilla Guillen told a group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators that his president had decided to maintain diplomatic ties with Taiwan, despite pressure from the Chinese government and local businesses who would like to see a switch to Beijing. This followed the Paraguayan Senate earlier this year voting against a proposal to establish ties with China in exchange for medical supplies. This constituted a double rebuke of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) diplomatic agenda in a six-month span from Taiwan’s only diplomatic ally in South America. Last year, Tuvalu rejected an
US President Donald Trump’s administration on Friday last week announced it would impose sanctions on the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, a vast paramilitary organization that is directly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and has been linked to human rights violations against Uighurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang. The sanctions follow US travel bans against other Xinjiang officials and the passage of the US Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which authorizes targeted sanctions against mainland Chinese and Hong Kong officials, in response to Beijing’s imposition of national security legislation on the territory. The sanctions against the corps would be implemented
US President Donald Trump on Thursday issued executive orders barring Americans from conducting business with WeChat owner Tencent Holdings and ByteDance, the Beijing-based owner of popular video-sharing app TikTok. The orders are to take effect 45 days after they were signed, which is Sept. 20. The orders accuse WeChat of helping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) review and remove content that it considers to be politically sensitive, and of using fabricated news to benefit itself. The White House has accused TikTok of collecting users’ information, location data and browsing histories, which could be used by the Chinese government, and pose